MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062826454 · doi:10.1063/1.4807480

Sensitive dependence on initial conditions in gene networks

2013· article· en· W2062826454 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Machina, Roderick Edwards, P. van den Driessche

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAttractorLimitingSigmoid functionStatistical physicsPerturbation (astronomy)Singular perturbationLimit (mathematics)MathematicsGene regulatory networkLimit cycleApplied mathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisGeneBiologyGene expressionArtificial neural networkGeneticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Active regulation in gene networks poses mathematical challenges that have led to conflicting approaches to analysis. Competing regulation that keeps concentrations of some transcription factors at or near threshold values leads to so-called singular dynamics when steeply sigmoidal interactions are approximated by step functions. An extension, due to Artstein and coauthors, of the classical singular perturbation approach was suggested as an appropriate way to handle the complex situation where non-trivial dynamics, such as a limit cycle, of fast variables occur in switching domains. This non-trivial behaviour can occur when a gene regulates multiple other genes at the same threshold. Here, it is shown that it is possible for nonuniqueness to arise in such a system in the case of limiting step-function interactions. This nonuniqueness is reminiscent of but not identical to the nonuniqueness of Filippov solutions. More realistic gene network models have sigmoidal interactions, however, and in the example considered here, it is shown numerically that the corresponding phenomenon in smooth systems is a sensitivity to initial conditions that leads in the limit to densely interwoven basins of attraction of different fixed point attractors.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207