MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108522401 · doi:10.1137/21m1389845

Multi-experiment Parameter Identifiability of ODEs and Model Theory

2022· article· en· W3108522401 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexey Ovchinnikov, Anand Pillay, Gleb Pogudin, Thomas Scanlon

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Applied Algebra and Geometry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIdentifiabilityOdeMathematicsContext (archaeology)Applied mathematicsPolynomialAlgorithmMathematical optimizationComputer scienceTheoretical computer scienceStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural identifiability is a property of an ODE model with parameters that allows for the parameters to be determined from continuous noise-free data. This is a natural prerequisite for practical identifiability. Conducting multiple independent experiments could make more parameters or functions of parameters identifiable, which is a desirable property to have. How many experiments are sufficient? In the present paper, we provide an algorithm to determine the exact number of experiments for multi-experiment local identifiability and obtain an upper bound that is off at most by one for the number of experiments for multi-experiment global identifiability. Interestingly, the main theoretical ingredient of the algorithm has been discovered and proved using model theory (in the sense of mathematical logic). Based on the insights from the model-theoretic argument, an algebraic proof presented in the paper was obtained. We hope that this unexpected connection will stimulate interactions between applied algebra and model theory, and we provide a short introduction to model theory in the context of parameter identifiability. As another related application of model theory in this area, we construct a nonlinear ODE system with one output such that single-experiment and multiple-experiment identifiability are different for the system. This contrasts with recent results about single-output linear systems. We also present a Monte Carlo randomized version of the algorithm with a polynomial arithmetic complexity. Implementation of the algorithm is provided and its performance is demonstrated on several examples.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Applied Algebra and GeometrySame topicOptimal Experimental Design MethodsFrench-language works237,207