Paper detail

A group theoretic approach to model comparison with simplicial representations

The complexity of biological systems, and the increasingly large amount of associated experimental data, necessitates that we develop mathematical models to further our understanding of these systems. As biological systems are generally not well understood, most mathematical models of these systems are based on experimental data, resulting in a seemingly heterogeneous collection of models that ostensibly represent the same system. To understand the system we therefore need to know how the different models are related, with a view to obtaining a unified mathematical description. This goal is complicated by the fact that distinct mathematical formalisms may be used to represent the same system, making direct comparison of the models very difficult. In previous work we developed an appropriate framework for model comparison where we represent models as labelled simplicial complexes and compare them with two general methodologies: comparison by distance or equivalence. In this article we continue the development of our model comparison methodology in two directions. First, we present a rigorous and automatable methodology for the core process of comparison by equivalence, namely determining the vertices in a simplicial representation, corresponding to model components, that are conceptually related and the identification of these vertices via simplicial operations. Our methodology is based on considerations of vertex symmetry in the simplicial representation, for which we develop the required mathematical theory of group actions on simplicial complexes. This methodology greatly simplifies and expedites the process of determining model equivalence. Second, we provide an alternative mathematical framework for our model-comparison methodology by representing models as groups, which allows for the direct application of group-theoretic techniques within our model-comparison methodology.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.