Sensitivity Analysis of Discrete Models and Application in Biological Networks

Understanding sensitivity is an important step to study system robustness and adaptability. In this work, we model and investigate intra-cellular networks via discrete modeling approach, which assigns a set of discrete values and a deterministic update rule to each model element. The models can be analyzed formally or simulated in a stochastic manner. We propose a comprehensive framework to study sensitivity in these models. In the framework, we define element influence (activity) and sensitivity with respect to the state distribution of the modeled system. Previous sensitivity analysis approaches all assume uniform state distribution, which is usually not true in biology. We perform both static and dynamic sensitivity analysis, the former assuming uniform state distribution, and the latter using a distribution estimated from stochastic simulation trajectories under a particular scenario. Additionally, we extended the element update functions to include weights according to these computed influences. Adding weights generates a weighted directed graph, and therefore, enables identifying key elements in the model and dominant signaling pathways that determine the behavior of the overall model. In the end, we apply our sensitivity analysis framework on pathway extraction in the intra-cellular networks that control T cells differentiation.

[1]  E. Dougherty,et al.  On the long-run sensitivity of probabilistic Boolean networks. , 2009, Journal of theoretical biology.

[2]  Edward R. Dougherty,et al.  Inference of Boolean Networks Using Sensitivity Regularization , 2008, EURASIP J. Bioinform. Syst. Biol..

[3]  S. Kauffman,et al.  Activities and sensitivities in boolean network models. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[4]  Edward R. Dougherty,et al.  From Boolean to probabilistic Boolean networks as models of genetic regulatory networks , 2002, Proc. IEEE.

[5]  Edward R. Dougherty,et al.  Probabilistic Boolean networks: a rule-based uncertainty model for gene regulatory networks , 2002, Bioinform..

[6]  Cheryl A. Telmer,et al.  Recipes for Translating Big Data Machine Reading to Executable Cellular Signaling Models , 2017, MOD.

[7]  James R Faeder,et al.  Rule-based modeling of biochemical systems with BioNetGen. , 2009, Methods in molecular biology.

[8]  S. Sakaguchi Regulatory T cells: history and perspective. , 2011, Methods in molecular biology.

[9]  E. Dougherty,et al.  Gene perturbation and intervention in probabilistic Boolean networks. , 2002, Bioinformatics.

[10]  Nagisa Ishiura,et al.  Shared binary decision diagram with attributed edges for efficient Boolean function manipulation , 1990, 27th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference.

[11]  James R Faeder,et al.  The Duration of T Cell Stimulation Is a Critical Determinant of Cell Fate and Plasticity , 2013, Science Signaling.

[12]  Giovanni De Micheli,et al.  Modeling stochasticity and robustness in gene regulatory networks , 2009, Bioinform..

[13]  Martin Bossert,et al.  Analysis of random Boolean networks using the average sensitivity , 2007 .

[14]  Nathan Linial,et al.  The influence of variables on Boolean functions , 1988, [Proceedings 1988] 29th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[15]  S. Kauffman,et al.  Genetic networks with canalyzing Boolean rules are always stable. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Khaled Sayed,et al.  DiSH simulator: Capturing dynamics of cellular signaling with heterogeneous knowledge , 2017, 2017 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC).

[17]  Fabio Somenzi,et al.  CUDD: CU Decision Diagram Package Release 2.2.0 , 1998 .

[18]  Beate Bollig,et al.  Improving the Variable Ordering of OBDDs Is NP-Complete , 1996, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[19]  Edward R. Dougherty,et al.  Coefficient of determination in nonlinear signal processing , 2000, Signal Process..