IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fast uncertainty quantification for dynamic flux balance analysis using non-smooth polynomial chaos expansions

Author

Listed:
  • Joel A Paulson
  • Marc Martin-Casas
  • Ali Mesbah

Abstract

We present a novel surrogate modeling method that can be used to accelerate the solution of uncertainty quantification (UQ) problems arising in nonlinear and non-smooth models of biological systems. In particular, we focus on dynamic flux balance analysis (DFBA) models that couple intracellular fluxes, found from the solution of a constrained metabolic network model of the cellular metabolism, to the time-varying nature of the extracellular substrate and product concentrations. DFBA models are generally computationally expensive and present unique challenges to UQ, as they entail dynamic simulations with discrete events that correspond to switches in the active set of the solution of the constrained intracellular model. The proposed non-smooth polynomial chaos expansion (nsPCE) method is an extension of traditional PCE that can effectively capture singularities in the DFBA model response due to the occurrence of these discrete events. The key idea in nsPCE is to use a model of the singularity time to partition the parameter space into two elements on which the model response behaves smoothly. Separate PCE models are then fit in both elements using a basis-adaptive sparse regression approach that is known to scale well with respect to the number of uncertain parameters. We demonstrate the effectiveness of nsPCE on a DFBA model of an E. coli monoculture that consists of 1075 reactions and 761 metabolites. We first illustrate how traditional PCE is unable to handle problems of this level of complexity. We demonstrate that over 800-fold savings in computational cost of uncertainty propagation and Bayesian estimation of parameters in the substrate uptake kinetics can be achieved by using the nsPCE surrogates in place of the full DFBA model simulations. We then investigate the scalability of the nsPCE method by utilizing it for global sensitivity analysis and maximum a posteriori estimation in a synthetic metabolic network problem with a larger number of parameters related to both intracellular and extracellular quantities.Author summary: Construction and validation of mathematical models in biological systems involving genome-scale biomolecular networks is a challenging problem. This article presents a novel surrogate modeling method that can accelerate parameter inference from experimental data and the quantification of uncertainty in the predictions of complex dynamic biological models, with a particular emphasis on nonlinear models with non-smooth behavior. The method is applied to infer extracellular kinetic parameters in a batch fermentation reactor consisting of diauxic growth of E. coli on a glucose/xylose mixed media as well as a larger synthetic metabolic network problem. The proposed approach enables rigorous quantification of parameter uncertainty to determine whether or not available data is sufficient for estimation of all unknown model parameters.

Suggested Citation

  • Joel A Paulson & Marc Martin-Casas & Ali Mesbah, 2019. "Fast uncertainty quantification for dynamic flux balance analysis using non-smooth polynomial chaos expansions," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-35, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007308
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007308
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007308
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007308&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007308?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Markus W. Covert & Eric M. Knight & Jennifer L. Reed & Markus J. Herrgard & Bernhard O. Palsson, 2004. "Integrating high-throughput and computational data elucidates bacterial networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 429(6987), pages 92-96, May.
    2. Elizabeth G. Ryan & Christopher C. Drovandi & James M. McGree & Anthony N. Pettitt, 2016. "A Review of Modern Computational Algorithms for Bayesian Optimal Design," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 84(1), pages 128-154, April.
    3. Deman, G. & Konakli, K. & Sudret, B. & Kerrou, J. & Perrochet, P. & Benabderrahmane, H., 2016. "Using sparse polynomial chaos expansions for the global sensitivity analysis of groundwater lifetime expectancy in a multi-layered hydrogeological model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 156-169.
    4. Nicolas Chopin, 2002. "A sequential particle filter method for static models," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 89(3), pages 539-552, August.
    5. Marissa Renardy & Tau-Mu Yi & Dongbin Xiu & Ching-Shan Chou, 2018. "Parameter uncertainty quantification using surrogate models applied to a spatial model of yeast mating polarization," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-26, May.
    6. Marc C. Kennedy & Anthony O'Hagan, 2001. "Bayesian calibration of computer models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 63(3), pages 425-464.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mevin Hooten & Christopher Wikle & Michael Schwob, 2020. "Statistical Implementations of Agent‐Based Demographic Models," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 88(2), pages 441-461, August.
    2. Brendan Kochunas & Xun Huan, 2021. "Digital Twin Concepts with Uncertainty for Nuclear Power Applications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.
    3. McGree, J.M., 2017. "Developments of the total entropy utility function for the dual purpose of model discrimination and parameter estimation in Bayesian design," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 207-225.
    4. Jung, Yongsu & Lee, Ikjin, 2021. "Optimal design of experiments for optimization-based model calibration using Fisher information matrix," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    5. Vanslette, Kevin & Tohme, Tony & Youcef-Toumi, Kamal, 2020. "A general model validation and testing tool," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    6. Matthias Katzfuss & Joseph Guinness & Wenlong Gong & Daniel Zilber, 2020. "Vecchia Approximations of Gaussian-Process Predictions," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 25(3), pages 383-414, September.
    7. Jakub Bijak & Jason D. Hilton & Eric Silverman & Viet Dung Cao, 2013. "Reforging the Wedding Ring," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 29(27), pages 729-766.
    8. Mevin B. Hooten & Michael R. Schwob & Devin S. Johnson & Jacob S. Ivan, 2023. "Multistage hierarchical capture–recapture models," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(6), September.
    9. Hao Wu & Michael Browne, 2015. "Random Model Discrepancy: Interpretations and Technicalities (A Rejoinder)," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 619-624, September.
    10. Arnaud Dufays, 2016. "Evolutionary Sequential Monte Carlo Samplers for Change-Point Models," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-33, March.
    11. Jeong Eun Lee & Christian Robert, 2013. "Imortance Sampling Schemes for Evidence Approximation in Mixture Models," Working Papers 2013-42, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    12. Daniel Harenberg & Stefano Marelli & Bruno Sudret & Viktor Winschel, 2019. "Uncertainty quantification and global sensitivity analysis for economic models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(1), pages 1-41, January.
    13. James Martin & Ajay Jasra & Emma McCoy, 2013. "Inference for a class of partially observed point process models," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 65(3), pages 413-437, June.
    14. Villez, Kris & Del Giudice, Dario & Neumann, Marc B. & Rieckermann, Jörg, 2020. "Accounting for erroneous model structures in biokinetic process models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    15. Xiaoyu Xiong & Benjamin D. Youngman & Theodoros Economou, 2021. "Data fusion with Gaussian processes for estimation of environmental hazard events," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), May.
    16. Nathaniel Tomasetti & Catherine Forbes & Anastasios Panagiotelis, 2019. "Updating Variational Bayes: Fast Sequential Posterior Inference," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 13/19, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    17. Petropoulos, G. & Wooster, M.J. & Carlson, T.N. & Kennedy, M.C. & Scholze, M., 2009. "A global Bayesian sensitivity analysis of the 1d SimSphere soil–vegetation–atmospheric transfer (SVAT) model using Gaussian model emulation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(19), pages 2427-2440.
    18. David Breitenmoser & Francesco Cerutti & Gernot Butterweck & Malgorzata Magdalena Kasprzak & Sabine Mayer, 2023. "Emulator-based Bayesian inference on non-proportional scintillation models by compton-edge probing," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    19. Drignei, Dorin, 2011. "A general statistical model for computer experiments with time series output," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 460-467.
    20. Yuan, Jun & Nian, Victor & Su, Bin & Meng, Qun, 2017. "A simultaneous calibration and parameter ranking method for building energy models," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 657-666.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007308. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.