↓ Skip to main content

A checkpoints capturing timing-robust Boolean model of the budding yeast cell cycle regulatory network

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
A checkpoints capturing timing-robust Boolean model of the budding yeast cell cycle regulatory network
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1752-0509-6-129
Pubmed ID
Authors

Changki Hong, Minho Lee, Dongsup Kim, Dongsan Kim, Kwang-Hyun Cho, Insik Shin

Abstract

Cell cycle process of budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) consists of four phases: G1, S, G2 and M. Initiated by stimulation of the G1 phase, cell cycle returns to the G1 stationary phase through a sequence of the S, G2 and M phases. During the cell cycle, a cell verifies whether necessary conditions are satisfied at the end of each phase (i.e., checkpoint) since damages of any phase can cause severe cell cycle defect. The cell cycle can proceed to the next phase properly only if checkpoint conditions are met. Over the last decade, there have been several studies to construct Boolean models that capture checkpoint conditions. However, they mostly focused on robustness to network perturbations, and the timing robustness has not been much addressed. Only recently, some studies suggested extension of such models towards timing-robust models, but they have not considered checkpoint conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 46%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Computer Science 3 13%
Engineering 2 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 1 4%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 October 2012.
All research outputs
#13,671,297
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#510
of 1,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,846
of 172,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,142 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 172,156 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.