Maximin and Bayesian robust experimental design for measurement set selection in modelling biochemical regulatory systems
Open accessAbstract
Experimental design is important in system identification, especially when the models are complex and the measurement data are sparse and noisy, as often occurs in modelling of biochemical regulatory networks. The quality of conventional optimal experimental design largely depends on the accuracy of model parameter estimation, which is often either unavailable or poorly estimated at the stage of design. Robust experimental design (RED) algorithms have thus been proposed when model parametric uncertainties need to be addressed during the design process. In this paper, two robust design strategies are investigated and the comparative study has been made on signal pathway models. The first method is a maximin experimental design approach which is a worst‐case design strategy, and the second method is the Bayesian experimental design that ‘takes an average’ of the parametric uncertainty effects. The limitations of the maximin design which describes the structural uncertainty using a local Taylor representation are quantitatively evaluated. To better quantitatively assess the differences between the maximin and the Bayesian REDs, a concept of effective design parameters is proposed, from which the advantages of the Bayesian design is demonstrated especially in the case of large model uncertainties. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
He et al. compared maximin and Bayesian robust design strategies and found a trade-off: Bayesian design led to less conservative results but had higher computational cost.
“He et al. [148] compared two robust design strategies, maximin (worst-case) and Bayesian, finding a trade-off between them: while the Bayesian design led to less conservative results than the maximin, it also had a higher computational cost.”
From Reverse engineering and identification in systems biology: strategies, perspectives and challenges (2014) · cites this paper as [148]
The topic of optimal design of dynamic experiments in biological systems is receiving increased attention.
“The topic of optimal design of dynamic experiments in biological systems is receiving increased attention [144–152].”
From Reverse engineering and identification in systems biology: strategies, perspectives and challenges (2014) · cites this paper as [148]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 24
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Voit EO. Computational Analysis of Biochemical Systems. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K., 2000.
- Copyright q 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 2010; 20:1059-1078 DOI: 10.1002/rnc · DOI
- Korkel S, Bauer I, Bock HG, Schloder JP. A sequential approach for nonlinear optimum experimental design in DAE system. Proceedings of International Workshop on Scientific Computing in Chemical Engineering, vol. II. TU Hamburg- Harburg: Germany, 1999.
- Korkel S, Hans EK, Bock HG, Schloder JP. Numerical methods for optimal control problems in design of robust optimal experiments for nonlinear dynamic processes. Optimization Methods and Software 2004; 19(3-4): 327-338.
- Asprey SP, Macchietto S. Designing robust optimal dynamic experiments. Journal of Process Control 2002; 12: 545-556.
- Authors
- He, F., Brown, M., & Yue, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Strathclyde (GB)
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Yue, Hong
- Venue
- International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-03-23
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1059-1078
- ISSN
- 1049-8923 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1239
- OpenAlex
- W1996592514
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 3.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Chinese NSFC Project (30770560)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Optimal Experimental Design Methods
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Control Systems and Identification
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
- Keywords
- robust experimental design, maximin designs, Bayesian experimental design, parameter uncertainty, structural uncertainty, system identification, model uncertainty
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review