Constructing kinetic models of metabolism at genome‐scales: A review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Constraint-based modeling of biological networks (metabolism, transcription and signal transduction), although used successfully in many applications, suffer from specific limitations such as the lack of representation of metabolite concentrations and enzymatic regulation, which are necessary for a complete physiologically relevant model. Kinetic models conversely overcome these shortcomings and enable dynamic analysis of biological systems for enhanced in silico hypothesis generation. Nonetheless, kinetic models also have limitations for modeling at genome-scales chiefly due to: (i) model non-linearity; (ii) computational tractability; (iii) parameter identifiability; (iv) estimability; and (v) uncertainty. In order to support further development of kinetic models as viable alternatives to constraint-based models, this review presents a brief description of the existing obstacles towards building genome-scale kinetic models. Specific kinetic modeling frameworks capable of overcoming these obstacles are covered in this review. The tractability and physiological feasibility of these models are discussed with the objective of using available in vivo experimental observations to define the model parameter space. Among the different methods discussed, Monte Carlo kinetic models of metabolism stand out as potentially tractable methods to model genome scale networks while also addressing in vivo parameter uncertainty.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it