scholarly journals Overcoming the Challenges to Enhancing Experimental Plant Biology With Computational Modeling

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renee Dale ◽  
Scott Oswald ◽  
Amogh Jalihal ◽  
Mary-Francis LaPorte ◽  
Daniel M. Fletcher ◽  
...  

The study of complex biological systems necessitates computational modeling approaches that are currently underutilized in plant biology. Many plant biologists have trouble identifying or adopting modeling methods to their research, particularly mechanistic mathematical modeling. Here we address challenges that limit the use of computational modeling methods, particularly mechanistic mathematical modeling. We divide computational modeling techniques into either pattern models (e.g., bioinformatics, machine learning, or morphology) or mechanistic mathematical models (e.g., biochemical reactions, biophysics, or population models), which both contribute to plant biology research at different scales to answer different research questions. We present arguments and recommendations for the increased adoption of modeling by plant biologists interested in incorporating more modeling into their research programs. As some researchers find math and quantitative methods to be an obstacle to modeling, we provide suggestions for easy-to-use tools for non-specialists and for collaboration with specialists. This may especially be the case for mechanistic mathematical modeling, and we spend some extra time discussing this. Through a more thorough appreciation and awareness of the power of different kinds of modeling in plant biology, we hope to facilitate interdisciplinary, transformative research.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renee Dale ◽  
Scott Oswald ◽  
Amogh Jalihal ◽  
Mary-Francis Laporte ◽  
Daniel M. Fletcher ◽  
...  

The study of complex biological systems necessitates computational modeling approaches that are currently underutilized in plant biology. Many plant biologists have trouble identifying or adopting modeling methods to their research, particularly mechanistic mathematical modeling. Here we address challenges that limit the use of computational modeling methods, particularly mechanistic mathematical modeling. We divide computational modeling techniques into either pattern models (e.g., bioinformatics, machine learning, or morphology) or mechanistic mathematical models (e.g., biochemical reactions, biophysics, or population models), which both contribute to plant biology research at different scales to answer different research questions. We present arguments and recommendations for the increased adoption of modeling by plant biologists interested in incorporating more modeling into their research programs. As some researchers find math and quantitative methods to be an obstacle to modeling, we provide suggestions for easy-to-use tools for non-specialists and for collaboration with specialists. This may especially be the case for mechanistic mathematical modeling, and we spend some extra time discussing this. Through a more thorough appreciation and awareness of the power of different kinds of modeling in plant biology, we hope to facilitate interdisciplinary, transformative research.


Author(s):  
N. K. Smagulov ◽  
A. A. Adilbekova ◽  
N. V. Gitenis

The use of mathematical modeling methods allowed us to develop criteria for functional stress for assessing and predicting the level of functional stress of foreign students in the process of adaptation to the educational process.


Author(s):  
William B. Rouse

This book discusses the use of models and interactive visualizations to explore designs of systems and policies in determining whether such designs would be effective. Executives and senior managers are very interested in what “data analytics” can do for them and, quite recently, what the prospects are for artificial intelligence and machine learning. They want to understand and then invest wisely. They are reasonably skeptical, having experienced overselling and under-delivery. They ask about reasonable and realistic expectations. Their concern is with the futurity of decisions they are currently entertaining. They cannot fully address this concern empirically. Thus, they need some way to make predictions. The problem is that one rarely can predict exactly what will happen, only what might happen. To overcome this limitation, executives can be provided predictions of possible futures and the conditions under which each scenario is likely to emerge. Models can help them to understand these possible futures. Most executives find such candor refreshing, perhaps even liberating. Their job becomes one of imagining and designing a portfolio of possible futures, assisted by interactive computational models. Understanding and managing uncertainty is central to their job. Indeed, doing this better than competitors is a hallmark of success. This book is intended to help them understand what fundamentally needs to be done, why it needs to be done, and how to do it. The hope is that readers will discuss this book and develop a “shared mental model” of computational modeling in the process, which will greatly enhance their chances of success.


2021 ◽  
pp. 174569162096679
Author(s):  
Ivan Grahek ◽  
Mark Schaller ◽  
Jennifer L. Tackett

Discussions about the replicability of psychological studies have primarily focused on improving research methods and practices, with less attention paid to the role of well-specified theories in facilitating the production of reliable empirical results. The field is currently in need of clearly articulated steps to theory specification and development, particularly regarding frameworks that may generalize across different fields of psychology. Here we focus on two approaches to theory specification and development that are typically associated with distinct research traditions: computational modeling and construct validation. We outline the points of convergence and divergence between them to illuminate the anatomy of a scientific theory in psychology—what a well-specified theory should contain and how it should be interrogated and revised through iterative theory-development processes. We propose how these two approaches can be used in complementary ways to increase the quality of explanations and the precision of predictions offered by psychological theories.


Sensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (20) ◽  
pp. 5953 ◽  
Author(s):  
Parastoo Alinia ◽  
Ali Samadani ◽  
Mladen Milosevic ◽  
Hassan Ghasemzadeh ◽  
Saman Parvaneh

Automated lying-posture tracking is important in preventing bed-related disorders, such as pressure injuries, sleep apnea, and lower-back pain. Prior research studied in-bed lying posture tracking using sensors of different modalities (e.g., accelerometer and pressure sensors). However, there remain significant gaps in research regarding how to design efficient in-bed lying posture tracking systems. These gaps can be articulated through several research questions, as follows. First, can we design a single-sensor, pervasive, and inexpensive system that can accurately detect lying postures? Second, what computational models are most effective in the accurate detection of lying postures? Finally, what physical configuration of the sensor system is most effective for lying posture tracking? To answer these important research questions, in this article we propose a comprehensive approach for designing a sensor system that uses a single accelerometer along with machine learning algorithms for in-bed lying posture classification. We design two categories of machine learning algorithms based on deep learning and traditional classification with handcrafted features to detect lying postures. We also investigate what wearing sites are the most effective in the accurate detection of lying postures. We extensively evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithms on nine different body locations and four human lying postures using two datasets. Our results show that a system with a single accelerometer can be used with either deep learning or traditional classifiers to accurately detect lying postures. The best models in our approach achieve an F1 score that ranges from 95.2% to 97.8% with a coefficient of variation from 0.03 to 0.05. The results also identify the thighs and chest as the most salient body sites for lying posture tracking. Our findings in this article suggest that, because accelerometers are ubiquitous and inexpensive sensors, they can be a viable source of information for pervasive monitoring of in-bed postures.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hae Deok Jung ◽  
Yoo Jin Sung ◽  
Hyun Uk Kim

Chemotherapy is a mainstream cancer treatment, but has a constant challenge of drug resistance, which consequently leads to poor prognosis in cancer treatment. For better understanding and effective treatment of drug-resistant cancer cells, omics approaches have been widely conducted in various forms. A notable use of omics data beyond routine data mining is to use them for computational modeling that allows generating useful predictions, such as drug responses and prognostic biomarkers. In particular, an increasing volume of omics data has facilitated the development of machine learning models. In this mini review, we highlight recent studies on the use of multi-omics data for studying drug-resistant cancer cells. We put a particular focus on studies that use computational models to characterize drug-resistant cancer cells, and to predict biomarkers and/or drug responses. Computational models covered in this mini review include network-based models, machine learning models and genome-scale metabolic models. We also provide perspectives on future research opportunities for combating drug-resistant cancer cells.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document