Cited by 858Gene Regulatory Network AnalysisMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research

Parameter estimation in biochemical pathways: a comparison of global optimization methods

Open access
Moles, Carmen G., Mendes, Pedro, Banga, Julio R.·2003·Genome Research

Abstract

Here we address the problem of parameter estimation (inverse problem)of nonlinear dynamic biochemical pathways. This problem is stated as a nonlinear programming (NLP)problem subject to nonlinear differential-algebraic constraints. These problems are known to be frequently ill-conditioned and multimodal. Thus, traditional (gradient-based)local optimization methods fail to arrive at satisfactory solutions. To surmount this limitation, the use of several state-of-the-art deterministic and stochastic global optimization methods is explored. A case study considering the estimation of 36 parameters of a nonlinear biochemical dynamic model is taken as a benchmark. Only a certain type of stochastic algorithm, evolution strategies (ES), is able to solve this problem successfully. Although these stochastic methods cannot guarantee global optimality with certainty, their robustness, plus the fact that in inverse problems they have a known lower bound for the cost function, make them the best available candidates.

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 · 10.1101/gr.1262503

Cites

51 of 51 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?

  • Stochastic optimization methods usually take longer to converge but run a smaller risk of converging to a local sub-optimal minimum than deterministic methods.

    “Whereas the stochastic methods usually take longer to converge, they run a smaller risk of converging to a local sub-optimal minimum [53,54].”
  • Approximate methods such as stochastic algorithms and metaheuristics are a more attractive alternative for problems of realistic size.

    “Therefore, based on the current status of the NP issue [111], approximate methods (such as stochastic algorithms and metaheuristics) are a more attractive alternative for problems of realistic size [112–114].”

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. Banga, J.R. and Casares, J.J. 1987. ICRS: Application to a wastewater treatment plant model. In IChemE Symposium Series No. 100, pp. 183-192. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
  2. Banga, J.R., Alonso, A.A., Moles, C.G., and Balsa-Canto, E. 2002. Efficient and robust numerical strategies for the optimal control of non-linear bio-processes. In Proceedings of the Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED2002), (eds. J.S. Sentievio and M. Attrans), CD-ROM. IEEE CSS, Lisbon, Portugal.
  3. Hansen, N. and Ostermeier, A. 1997. Convergence properties of evolution strategies with the derandomized covariance matrix adaptation: the (µ/µI, )-CMA-ES. In Proceedings of the 5th European Congress on Intelligent Techniques and Soft Computing, EUFIT '97 pp. 650-654. Verlag Maing, Auchen, Germany.
  4. Hindmarsh, A.C. 1983. ODEPACK, a systematized collection of ODE solvers. In Scientific computing (ed. R.S. Stepleman), pp. 55-64. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moles, C. G., Mendes, P., & Banga, J. R.
Affiliations
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • Virginia Tech (US)
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2003-01-01
Volume
13
Issue
11
Pages
2467-2474
ISSN
1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165603655
Cited by
858
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 63 · 2012: 64
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0120306, 0217653, 0109732)
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Metaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Keywords
parameter estimation, inverse problems, metabolic pathways, nonlinear dynamic model, global optimization, evolution strategies, stochastic optimization, deterministic optimization, multimodal optimization, ill-conditioned problems
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Computer Simulation, Genetic Engineering, Models, Chemical, Molecular Biology, Predictive Value of Tests, Software, Stochastic Processes, HIV Protease, HIV Protease Inhibitors, Nonlinear Dynamics, Evolution, Molecular, Computational 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