Literature DB >> 21071794

Efficient formulations for exact stochastic simulation of chemical systems.

Sean Mauch1, Mark Stalzer.   

Abstract

One can generate trajectories to simulate a system of chemical reactions using either Gillespie's direct method or Gibson and Bruck's next reaction method. Because one usually needs many trajectories to understand the dynamics of a system, performance is important. In this paper, we present new formulations of these methods that improve the computational complexity of the algorithms. We present optimized implementations, available from http://cain.sourceforge.net/, that offer better performance than previous work. There is no single method that is best for all problems. Simple formulations often work best for systems with a small number of reactions, while some sophisticated methods offer the best performance for large problems and scale well asymptotically. We investigate the performance of each formulation on simple biological systems using a wide range of problem sizes. We also consider the numerical accuracy of the direct and the next reaction method. We have found that special precautions must be taken in order to ensure that randomness is not discarded during the course of a simulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21071794     DOI: 10.1109/TCBB.2009.47

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform        ISSN: 1545-5963            Impact factor:   3.710


  13 in total

1.  An efficient method for computing steady state solutions with Gillespie's direct method.

Authors:  S Mauch; M Stalzer
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2010-10-14       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Constant-complexity stochastic simulation algorithm with optimal binning.

Authors:  Kevin R Sanft; Hans G Othmer
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  BioSimulator.jl: Stochastic simulation in Julia.

Authors:  Alfonso Landeros; Timothy Stutz; Kevin L Keys; Alexander Alekseyenko; Janet S Sinsheimer; Kenneth Lange; Mary E Sehl
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  Lazy Updating of hubs can enable more realistic models by speeding up stochastic simulations.

Authors:  Kurt Ehlert; Laurence Loewe
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2014-11-28       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  Perspective: Stochastic algorithms for chemical kinetics.

Authors:  Daniel T Gillespie; Andreas Hellander; Linda R Petzold
Journal:  J Chem Phys       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  Multiscale Modelling Tool: Mathematical modelling of collective behaviour without the maths.

Authors:  James A R Marshall; Andreagiovanni Reina; Thomas Bose
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Self-organised segregation of bacterial chromosomal origins.

Authors:  Andreas Hofmann; Jarno Mäkelä; David J Sherratt; Dieter Heermann; Seán M Murray
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-08-09       Impact factor: 8.140

8.  Efficient anticorrelated variance reduction for stochastic simulation of biochemical reactions.

Authors:  Vo Hong Thanh
Journal:  IET Syst Biol       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.615

9.  Rate-independent constructs for chemical computation.

Authors:  Phillip Senum; Marc Riedel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Intrinsic noise analyzer: a software package for the exploration of stochastic biochemical kinetics using the system size expansion.

Authors:  Philipp Thomas; Hannes Matuschek; Ramon Grima
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-12       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.