MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143145695 · doi:10.1109/tnb.2009.2035114

A Computational Tool for Monte Carlo Simulations of Biomolecular Reaction Networks Modeled on Physical Principles

2009· article· en· W2143145695 on OpenAlexafffund
Isaac T. S. Li, Evan Mills, Kevin Truong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on NanoBioscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceStatistical physicsBiological systemMolecular biophysicsSystems biologyPhysicsComputational biologyMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deciphering and designing complex biomolecular networks in the cell are the goals of systems and synthetic biology, respectively. The effects of localization, spatial heterogeneity, and molecular fluctuations in biomolecular networks are not well understood. We present a theoretical approach based on physical principles to accurately simulate biomolecular networks using the Monte Carlo method. Incorporating this theory, a computational tool named Monte Carlo biomolecular simulator (MBS) was developed, enabling studies of biomolecular kinetics with both spatial and temporal resolutions. The accuracy of MBS was verified by comparison against the classical deterministic approaches. Furthermore, the effects of localization, spatial heterogeneity, and molecular fluctuations were studied in three simulated model systems, showing their impact on the overall reaction kinetics. This work demonstrates the unique insights that can be discovered by considering the subtle effects that can be created by the spatial and temporal kinetics of biomolecular reaction networks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on NanoBioscienceSame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207