↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating model reduction under parameter uncertainty

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating model reduction under parameter uncertainty
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12918-018-0602-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Håvard G. Frøysa, Shirin Fallahi, Nello Blaser

Abstract

The dynamics of biochemical networks can be modelled by systems of ordinary differential equations. However, these networks are typically large and contain many parameters. Therefore model reduction procedures, such as lumping, sensitivity analysis and time-scale separation, are used to simplify models. Although there are many different model reduction procedures, the evaluation of reduced models is difficult and depends on the parameter values of the full model. There is a lack of a criteria for evaluating reduced models when the model parameters are uncertain. We developed a method to compare reduced models and select the model that results in similar dynamics and uncertainty as the original model. We simulated different parameter sets from the assumed parameter distributions. Then, we compared all reduced models for all parameter sets using cluster analysis. The clusters revealed which of the reduced models that were similar to the original model in dynamics and variability. This allowed us to select the smallest reduced model that best approximated the full model. Through examples we showed that when parameter uncertainty was large, the model should be reduced further and when parameter uncertainty was small, models should not be reduced much. A method to compare different models under parameter uncertainty is developed. It can be applied to any model reduction method. We also showed that the amount of parameter uncertainty influences the choice of reduced models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Researcher 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 26%
Mathematics 3 13%
Chemical Engineering 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 9 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,529,173
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#1,011
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,687
of 330,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#13
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,144 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.