Distilling identifiable and interpretable dynamic models from biological data

Mechanistic dynamical models allow us to study the behavior of complex biological systems. They can provide an objective and quantitative understanding that would be difficult to achieve through other means. However, the systematic development of these models is a non-trivial exercise and an open problem in computational biology. Currently, many research efforts are focused on model discovery, i.e. automating the development of interpretable models from data. One of the main frameworks is sparse regression, where the sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics (SINDy) algorithm and its variants have enjoyed great success. SINDy-PI is an extension which allows the discovery of rational nonlinear terms, thus enabling the identification of kinetic functions common in biochemical networks, such as Michaelis-Menten. SINDy-PI also pays special attention to the recovery of parsimonious models (Occam's razor). Here we focus on biological models composed of sets of deterministic nonlinear ordinary differential equations. We present a methodology that, combined with SINDy-PI, allows the automatic discovery of structurally identifiable and observable models which are also mechanistically interpretable. The lack of structural identifiability and observability makes it impossible to uniquely infer parameter and state variables, which can compromise the usefulness of a model by distorting its mechanistic significance and hampering its ability to produce biological insights. We illustrate the performance of our method with six case studies. We find that, despite enforcing sparsity, SINDy-PI sometimes yields models that are unidentifiable. In these cases we show how our method transforms their equations in order to obtain a structurally identifiable and observable model which is also interpretable.

Improving dynamic predictions with ensembles of observable models

MOTIVATION

Dynamic mechanistic modelling in systems biology has been hampered by the complexity and variability associated with the underlying interactions, and by uncertain and sparse experimental measurements. Ensemble modelling, a concept initially developed in statistical mechanics, has been introduced in biological applications with the aim of mitigating those issues. Ensemble modelling uses a collection of different models compatible with the observed data to describe the phenomena of interest. However, since systems biology models often suffer from a lack of identifiability and observability, ensembles of models are particularly unreliable when predicting non-observable states.

RESULTS

We present a strategy to assess and improve the reliability of a class of model ensembles. In particular, we consider kinetic models described using ordinary differential equations with a fixed structure. Our approach builds an ensemble with a selection of the parameter vectors found when performing parameter estimation with a global optimization metaheuristic. This technique enforces diversity during the sampling of parameter space and it can quantify the uncertainty in the predictions of state trajectories. We couple this strategy with structural identifiability and observability analysis, and when these tests detect possible prediction issues we obtain model reparameterizations that surmount them. The end result is an ensemble of models with the ability to predict the internal dynamics of a biological process. We demonstrate our approach with models of glucose regulation, cell division, circadian oscillations and the JAK-STAT signalling pathway.

AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION

The code that implements the methodology and reproduces the results is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6782638.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

On testing structural identifiability by a simple scaling method: Relying on scaling symmetries can be misleading

A recent paper published in PLOS Computational Biology [1] introduces the Scaling Invariance Method (SIM) for analysing structural local identifiability and observability. These two properties define mathematically the possibility of determining the values of the parameters (identifiability) and states (observability) of a dynamic model by observing its output. In this note we warn that SIM considers scaling symmetries as the only possible cause of non-identifiability and non-observability. We show that other types of symmetries can cause the same problems without being detected by SIM, and that in those cases the method may lead one to conclude that the model is identifiable and observable when it is actually not.

Structural identifiability and observability of compartmental models of the COVID-19 pandemic

The recent coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak has dramatically increased the public awareness and appreciation of the utility of dynamic models. At the same time, the dissemination of contradictory model predictions has highlighted their limitations. If some parameters and/or state variables of a model cannot be determined from output measurements, its ability to yield correct insights - as well as the possibility of controlling the system - may be compromised. Epidemic dynamics are commonly analysed using compartmental models, and many variations of such models have been used for analysing and predicting the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper we survey the different models proposed in the literature, assembling a list of 36 model structures and assessing their ability to provide reliable information. We address the problem using the control theoretic concepts of structural identifiability and observability. Since some parameters can vary during the course of an epidemic, we consider both the constant and time-varying parameter assumptions. We analyse the structural identifiability and observability of all of the models, considering all plausible choices of outputs and time-varying parameters, which leads us to analyse 255 different model versions. We classify the models according to their structural identifiability and observability under the different assumptions and discuss the implications of the results. We also illustrate with an example several alternative ways of remedying the lack of observability of a model. Our analyses provide guidelines for choosing the most informative model for each purpose, taking into account the available knowledge and measurements.