Target Controllability of Linear Networks

Computational analysis of the structure of intra-cellular molecular interaction networks can suggest novel therapeutic approaches for systemic diseases like cancer. Recent research in the area of network science has shown that network control theory can be a powerful tool in the understanding and manipulation of such bio-medical networks. In 2011, Liu et al. developed a polynomial time optimization algorithm for computing the size of the minimal set of nodes controlling a given linear network. In 2014, Gao et al. generalized the problem for target structural control, where the objective is to optimize the size of the minimal set of nodes controlling a given target within a linear network. The working hypothesis in this case is that partial control might be “cheaper” (in the size of the controlling set) than the full control of a network. The authors developed a Greedy algorithm searching for the minimal solution of the structural target control problem, however, no suggestions were given over the actual complexity of the optimization problem. In here we prove that the structural target controllability problem is NP-hard when looking to minimize the number of driven nodes within the network, i.e., the first set of nodes which need to be directly controlled in order to structurally control the target. We also show that the Greedy algorithm provided by Gao et al. in 2014 might in some special cases fail to provide a valid solution, and a subsequent validation step is required. Also, we improve their search algorithm using several heuristics, obtaining in the end up to a 10-fold decrease in running time and also a significant decrease of the size of the minimal solution found by the algorithms.

[1]  R. Shields,et al.  Structural controliability of multi-input linear systems , 1975, 1975 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control including the 14th Symposium on Adaptive Processes.

[2]  Kevin R Brown,et al.  Essential gene profiles in breast, pancreatic, and ovarian cancer cells. , 2012, Cancer discovery.

[3]  A. Ashworth,et al.  Genetic Interactions in Cancer Progression and Treatment , 2011, Cell.

[4]  J. Pearson,et al.  Structural controllability of multiinput linear systems , 1976 .

[5]  Ching-tai Lin Structural controllability , 1974 .

[6]  Judice L. Y. Koh,et al.  COLT-Cancer: functional genetic screening resource for essential genes in human cancer cell lines , 2011, Nucleic Acids Res..

[7]  G. Superti-Furga,et al.  Gene essentiality and synthetic lethality in haploid human cells , 2015, Science.

[8]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Controllability of complex networks , 2011, Nature.

[9]  B. Kholodenko,et al.  The dynamic control of signal transduction networks in cancer cells , 2015, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[10]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Target control of complex networks , 2014, Nature Communications.

[11]  Livia Perfetto,et al.  SIGNOR: a database of causal relationships between biological entities , 2015, Nucleic Acids Res..

[12]  E. Lander,et al.  Identification and characterization of essential genes in the human genome , 2015, Science.

[13]  R. Kálmán Mathematical description of linear dynamical systems , 1963 .

[14]  A. Hopkins Network pharmacology: the next paradigm in drug discovery. , 2008, Nature chemical biology.

[15]  Kazuo Murota,et al.  Note on a graph-theoretic criterion for structural output controllability , 1990 .

[16]  Alan Ashworth,et al.  Searching for synthetic lethality in cancer. , 2011, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[17]  Réka Albert,et al.  Cell Fate Reprogramming by Control of Intracellular Network Dynamics , 2014, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[18]  Svatopluk Poljak,et al.  On the generic dimension of controllable subspaces , 1990 .

[19]  Michael Boutros,et al.  Towards a compendium of essential genes – From model organisms to synthetic lethality in cancer cells , 2015, Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology.