MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408848626 · doi:10.1016/j.ces.2025.121574

Solving the chemical master equation for stochastic biochemical systems: A variational autoencoder approach with effective reactions

2025· article· en· W4408848626 on OpenAlexafffund
Xinyi Zhou, Jingyi Lu, Furong Gao, Zhixing Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersScientific and Innovative Action Plan of ShanghaiNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaster equationAutoencoderChemical reactionApplied mathematicsComputer scienceStatistical physicsMathematicsChemistryPhysicsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stochasticity of biochemical reactions at mesoscopic scale presents significant challenges to our understanding of the underpinnings. The Chemical Master Equation (CME) serves as a crucial tool for describing the dynamics of biochemical reactions, but solving the CME is notoriously difficult and often faces the curse of dimensionality. In this paper, we propose an efficient CME solver for stochastic biochemical dynamics leveraging the power of Variational Autoencoder (VAE). VAE is employed to find effective reactions from a group of elementary reactions, reducing the complexity of the system. By using VAE to find equivalent propensity for a set of complex reactions, we simplify the intermediate reactions, reducing the sample size and time for training. The trained VAE can predict the distributions of unseen time points, different reaction structures and unobserved species. We show a robust method that simplifies the resolution of CME, providing a powerful tool for analyzing stochastic biochemical systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering ScienceSame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207