SBML Level 3 Brief Update

SBML is a machine-readable model representation language for software tools in computational systems biology. By supporting SBML as an input/output format, different tools can all operate on an identical representation of a model, removing opportunities for translation errors and assuring a common starting point for analyses and simulations.

The evolution of SBML continues. The latest iteration is SBML Level 3, a modular language consisting of a Core and optional "packages" that add topic-specific features to the Core to support more specialized models and application areas. In this presentation, I provide a very brief overview of SBML Level 3 activity areas

Minimum Information About a Simulation Experiment (MIASE)

Reproducibility of experiments is a basic requirement for science. Minimum Information (MI) guidelines have proved a helpful means of enabling reuse of existing work in modern biology. The Minimum Information Required in the Annotation of Models (MIRIAM) guidelines promote the exchange and reuse of biochemical computational models. However, information about a model alone is not sufficient to enable its efficient reuse in a computational setting. Advanced numerical algorithms and complex modeling workflows used in modern computational biology make reproduction of simulations difficult. It is therefore essential to define the core information necessary to perform simulations of those models. The Minimum Information About a Simulation Experiment (MIASE, Glossary in Box 1) describes the minimal set of information that must be provided to make the description of a simulation experiment available to others. It includes the list of models to use and their modifications, all the simulation procedures to apply and in which order, the processing of the raw numerical results, and the description of the final output. MIASE allows for the reproduction of any simulation experiment. The provision of this information, along with a set of required models, guarantees that the simulation experiment represents the intention of the original authors. Following MIASE guidelines will thus improve the quality of scientific reporting, and will also allow collaborative, more distributed efforts in computational modeling and simulation of biological processes

Controlled vocabularies and semantics in systems biology

The use of computational modeling to describe and analyze biological systems is at the heart of systems biology. Model structures, simulation descriptions and numerical results can be encoded in structured formats, but there is an increasing need to provide an additional semantic layer. Semantic information adds meaning to components of structured descriptions to help identify and interpret them unambiguously. Ontologies are one of the tools frequently used for this purpose. We describe here three ontologies created specifically to address the needs of the systems biology community. The Systems Biology Ontology (SBO) provides semantic information about the model components. The Kinetic Simulation Algorithm Ontology (KiSAO) supplies information about existing algorithms available for the simulation of systems biology models, their characterization and interrelationships. The Terminology for the Description of Dynamics (TEDDY) categorizes dynamical features of the simulation results and general systems behavior. The provision of semantic information extends a model's longevity and facilitates its reuse. It provides useful insight into the biology of modeled processes, and may be used to make informed decisions on subsequent simulation experiments

Organizing Community-Based Data Standards: Lessons from Developing a Successful Open Standard in Systems Biology

In common with many fields, including astronomy, a vast number of software tools for computational modeling and simulation are available today in systems biology. This wealth of resources is a boon to researchers, but it also presents interoperability problems. Despite working with different software tools, researchers want to disseminate their work widely as well as reuse and extend the models of other researchers. This situation led in the year 2000 to an effort to create a tool-independent, machine-readable file format for representing models: SBML, the Systems Biology Markup Language. SBML has since become the de facto standard for its purpose. Its success and general approach has inspired and influenced other community-oriented standardization efforts in systems biology. Open standards are essential for the progress of science in all fields, but it is often difficult for academic researchers to organize successful community-based standards. I draw on personal experiences from the development of SBML and summarize some of the lessons learned, in the hope that this may be useful to other groups seeking to develop open standards in a community-oriented fashion

MathSBML: a package for manipulating SBML-based biological models

Summary: MathSBML is a Mathematica package designed for manipulating Systems Biology Markup Language (SBML) models. It converts SBML models into Mathematica data structures and provides a platform for manipulating and evaluating these models. Once a model is read by MathSBML, it is fully compatible with standard Mathematica functions such as NDSolve (a differential-algebraic equations solver). Math-SBML also provides an application programming interface for viewing, manipulating, running numerical simulations; exporting SBML models; and converting SBML models in to other formats, such as XPP, HTML and FORTRAN. By accessing the full breadth of Mathematica functionality, MathSBML is fully extensible to SBML models of any size or complexity. Availability: Open Source (LGPL) at http://www.sbml.org and http://www.sf.net/projects/sbml. Supplementary information: Extensive online documentation is available at http://www.sbml.org/mathsbml.html. Additional examples are provided at http://www.sbml.org/software/mathsbml/bioinformatics-application-not

Do genome-scale models need exact solvers or clearer standards?

Constraint‐based analysis of genome‐scale models (GEMs) arose shortly after the first genome sequences became available. As numerous reviews of the field show, this approach and methodology has proven to be successful in studying a wide range of biological phenomena (McCloskey et al, 2013; Bordbar et al, 2014). However, efforts to expand the user base are impeded by hurdles in correctly formulating these problems to obtain numerical solutions. In particular, in a study entitled “An exact arithmetic toolbox for a consistent and reproducible structural analysis of metabolic network models” (Chindelevitch et al, 2014), the authors apply an exact solver to 88 genome‐scale constraint‐based models of metabolism. The authors claim that COBRA calculations (Orth et al, 2010) are inconsistent with their results and that many published and actively used (Lee et al, 2007; McCloskey et al, 2013) genome‐scale models do support cellular growth in existing studies only because of numerical errors. They base these broad claims on two observations: (i) three reconstructions (iAF1260, iIT341, and iNJ661) compute feasibly in COBRA, but are infeasible when exact numerical algorithms are used by their software (entitled MONGOOSE); (ii) linear programs generated by MONGOOSE for iIT341 were submitted to the NEOS Server (a Web site that runs linear programs through various solvers) and gave inconsistent results. They further claim that a large percentage of these COBRA models are actually unable to produce biomass flux. Here, we demonstrate that the claims made by Chindelevitch et al (2014) stem from an incorrect parsing of models from files rather than actual problems with numerical error or COBRA computations

Texture-Based Processing in Early Vision and a Proposed Role for Coarse-Scale Segmentation

Humans and other natural systems are remarkably adept at extracting spatial information from vision. To better understand this process, it would be useful to know how the visual system can make an initial estimate of where things are in a scene and how they are oriented. Texture is one source of information that the visual system can use for this purpose. It can be used both for segmenting the visual input and for estimating spatial orientations within segmented regions; moreover, each of these two processes can be performed starting with the same mechanisms, namely spatiotemporally-tuned cells in the visual cortex. But little attention has been given to the problem of integrating the two processes into a single system. In this paper, we discuss texture-based visual processing and review recent work in computer vision that offers insights into how a visual system could solve this problem. We then argue that a beneficial extension to these approaches would be to incorporate an initial coarse-scale segmentation step. We offer supporting evidence from psychophysics that the human visual system does in fact perform such a rough segmentation early in vision