Cited by 45Scientific Computing and Data ManagementGene Regulatory Network AnalysisResearch Data Management Practices

Best Practices for Making Reproducible Biochemical Models

Open access
Porubsky, Veronica L., Goldberg, Arthur P., Rampadarath, Anand K., Nickerson, David P., Karr, Jonathan R., Sauro, Herbert M.·2020·Cell Systems

Abstract

Like many scientific disciplines, dynamical biochemical modeling is hindered by irreproducible results. This limits the utility of biochemical models by making them difficult to understand, trust, or reuse. We comprehensively list the best practices that biochemical modelers should follow to build reproducible biochemical model artifacts-all data, model descriptions, and custom software used by the model-that can be understood and reused. The best practices provide advice for all steps of a typical biochemical modeling workflow in which a modeler collects data; constructs, trains, simulates, and validates the model; uses the predictions of a model to advance knowledge; and publicly shares the model artifacts. The best practices emphasize the benefits obtained by using standard tools and formats and provides guidance to modelers who do not or cannot use standards in some stages of their modeling workflow. Adoption of these best practices will enhance the ability of researchers to reproduce, understand, and reuse biochemical models.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cels.2020.06.012

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. American Journal of Political Science (AJPS). (2016). American journal of political science qualitative data verification checklist. https://ajps.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/ajps-qualdata-checklist-ver-1-0.pdf.
  2. Ewald R, and Uhrmacher AM (2014). SESSL: a domain-specific language for simulation experiments. ACM Trans. Model. Comput. Simul. 24, 1– 25.
  3. Rosen L (2005). Open Source Licensing, Volume 692 (Prentice Hall).
  4. Sherman MA, Middleton JL, Schmidt JP, Paik DS, Blemker SS, Habib AW, Anderson FC, Delp SL, and Altman RB (2005). The simtk framework for physics-based simulation of biological structures: preliminary design. In Proceedings of the workshop on component models and frameworks in high performance computing.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Porubsky, V. L., Goldberg, A. P., Rampadarath, A. K., Nickerson, D. P., Karr, J. R., & Sauro, H. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
  • Porubsky, Veronica L.
  • Goldberg, Arthur P.
Venue
Cell Systems
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-08
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
109-120
ISSN
2405-4712 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3080314885
Cited by
45
References
96
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell Systems (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Scientific Computing and Data Management
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
Keywords
reproducibility, biochemical models, dynamic modeling, model reuse, model sharing, model validation, model simulation, data sharing, standard adoption, model documentation, best practices
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Humans, Systems Biology

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