pith. sign in

arxiv: 2505.07638 · v3 · submitted 2025-05-12 · 🧮 math.PR · q-bio.MN

Identifiability of SDEs for reaction networks

Louis Faul , Linard Hoessly , Panqiu Xia This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 16:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.PR q-bio.MN
keywords reaction networksidentifiabilitydiffusion approximationstochastic differential equationsmass-action kineticschemical Langevin equationparameter estimation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Some reaction networks have non-identifiable reaction rates even when the law of their diffusion approximation is fully known.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The authors investigate when the probability law of the stochastic differential equation that approximates a mass-action reaction network can uniquely determine the reaction rates. They derive general conditions and practical theorems for checking identifiability of the diffusion law. The work demonstrates that identifiability can fail, so that different rate values produce the same law, and that networks with different reaction graphs can be tuned to share the same diffusion law. These results are compared against identifiability properties known for the corresponding deterministic ODE models and for the underlying continuous-time Markov chains. This clarifies the limits of parameter recovery when using continuous approximations to stochastic reaction systems.

Core claim

We derive conditions under which the law of the diffusion approximation is identifiable and provide theorems for verifying identifiability in practice. Notably, our results show that some reaction networks have non-identifiable reaction rates, even when the law of the corresponding stochastic process is completely known. Moreover, we show that reaction networks with distinct graphical structures can generate the same diffusion law under specific choices of reaction rates. Finally, we compare our framework with identifiability results in the deterministic ODE setting and the discrete continuous-time Markov chain models for reaction networks.

What carries the argument

The diffusion approximation of mass-action reaction networks, together with derived conditions and theorems that check whether its law uniquely pins down the rates and structure.

If this is right

  • Identifiability holds when the derived conditions on the network and rates are satisfied.
  • Non-identifiable cases exist where multiple reaction rate vectors produce identical diffusion laws.
  • Structurally different networks can be made equivalent by suitable rate choices.
  • The identifiability picture differs from both the deterministic ODE case and the discrete Markov chain case.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Modelers using diffusion approximations for biochemical systems may need to consider equivalence classes of networks rather than assuming unique recovery of parameters.
  • Additional data or constraints beyond the diffusion law may be required to resolve ambiguities in rate identification.
  • Similar non-identifiability phenomena could appear in other approximation regimes or larger network classes not covered here.

Load-bearing premise

The diffusion approximation provides an accurate model of the reaction network dynamics in the regimes of interest.

What would settle it

A specific reaction network and two different rate vectors that the theorems claim produce the same diffusion law, together with a direct verification that their SDE laws actually differ.

read the original abstract

Biochemical reaction networks are widely applied across scientific disciplines to model complex dynamic systems. We investigate the diffusion approximation of reaction networks with mass-action kinetics, focusing on the identifiability of the stochastic differential equations associated to the reaction network. We derive conditions under which the law of the diffusion approximation is identifiable and provide theorems for verifying identifiability in practice. Notably, our results show that some reaction networks have non-identifiable reaction rates, even when the law of the corresponding stochastic process is completely known. Moreover, we show that reaction networks with distinct graphical structures can generate the same diffusion law under specific choices of reaction rates. Finally, we compare our framework with identifiability results in the deterministic ODE setting and the discrete continuous-time Markov chain models for reaction networks.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper studies identifiability of reaction-rate parameters in the diffusion approximation (chemical Langevin equation) to mass-action reaction networks. It derives general conditions under which the law of the resulting SDE is identifiable, supplies verification theorems, exhibits explicit networks whose rates remain non-identifiable even when the full SDE law is known, shows that distinct reaction graphs can produce identical diffusion laws for suitable rate choices, and contrasts these findings with identifiability results already available for the corresponding deterministic ODE and discrete CTMC models.

Significance. If the stated conditions and counter-examples hold, the work supplies a precise mathematical distinction between identifiability regimes across modeling scales. The explicit construction of non-identifiable rates and of graph-equivalent diffusions is a concrete contribution that can inform both theoretical analysis and practical parameter estimation in stochastic biochemical models. The side-by-side comparison with ODE and CTMC identifiability results is a useful organizing feature.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3, Theorem 3.2] §3, Theorem 3.2 (verification theorem): the injectivity argument for the map from rate vector k to the pair (drift, diffusion) coefficients appears to rest on the linear independence of the stoichiometric columns; when the network admits a conservation law the diffusion matrix is singular on the invariant manifold, and it is not shown how the identifiability condition is modified or restricted to that manifold.
  2. [§4.1, Example 4.1] §4.1, Example 4.1 (distinct graphs, same diffusion law): the construction equates the infinitesimal generators by solving a system of algebraic equations for the rates; the example is low-dimensional and the paper does not indicate whether the same phenomenon persists for networks whose reaction vectors span a higher-dimensional space or whether it is an artifact of the chosen stoichiometry.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] The notation for the stoichiometric matrix, propensity functions, and diffusion matrix is introduced piecemeal; a consolidated table of symbols at the end of §2 would improve readability.
  2. [§5] In the comparison section (§5) the ODE identifiability statements are cited from the literature without restating the precise hypotheses; a short paragraph recalling the standard ODE result would make the contrast self-contained.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, positive assessment, and constructive comments. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3, Theorem 3.2] §3, Theorem 3.2 (verification theorem): the injectivity argument for the map from rate vector k to the pair (drift, diffusion) coefficients appears to rest on the linear independence of the stoichiometric columns; when the network admits a conservation law the diffusion matrix is singular on the invariant manifold, and it is not shown how the identifiability condition is modified or restricted to that manifold.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. Theorem 3.2 assumes linear independence of the stoichiometric vectors to guarantee that the map from rates to (drift, diffusion) coefficients is injective on the full state space. When conservation laws exist, the diffusion matrix is indeed singular in the directions orthogonal to the stoichiometric subspace. We will revise the statement of Theorem 3.2 to make explicit that identifiability is understood with respect to the law of the process on the invariant affine manifold. We will also add a remark clarifying that the coefficients are evaluated in coordinates adapted to this manifold, where the restricted diffusion matrix is non-degenerate. This revision addresses the restriction without changing the core injectivity argument. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4.1, Example 4.1] §4.1, Example 4.1 (distinct graphs, same diffusion law): the construction equates the infinitesimal generators by solving a system of algebraic equations for the rates; the example is low-dimensional and the paper does not indicate whether the same phenomenon persists for networks whose reaction vectors span a higher-dimensional space or whether it is an artifact of the chosen stoichiometry.

    Authors: The example is deliberately low-dimensional to permit explicit solution of the algebraic system that equates the drift and diffusion coefficients. The underlying construction—solving for rates such that the infinitesimal generator matches—is algebraic and does not inherently depend on dimension. We acknowledge that the manuscript does not discuss higher-dimensional cases. We will add a brief paragraph in §4.1 observing that analogous algebraic matching remains possible whenever the stoichiometric subspaces permit non-trivial solutions to the resulting polynomial system, and that the phenomenon is not an artifact of the chosen stoichiometry but follows from the under-determined nature of recovering rates from diffusion coefficients. We will note that concrete higher-dimensional examples would require case-by-case verification. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives identifiability conditions for the diffusion approximation SDE of mass-action reaction networks directly from the SDE coefficients and the law of the process, using standard results on weak uniqueness and parameter recovery for Itô processes. Theorems for verifying identifiability and counterexamples of non-identifiable rates or graph-equivalent networks are obtained by explicit construction of the drift and diffusion terms from the reaction stoichiometry and rates, without any fitted parameters renamed as predictions or load-bearing self-citations. The comparison to ODE and CTMC identifiability likewise proceeds from the respective model equations rather than reducing to prior author results. The central claims therefore remain independent of the inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard mathematical properties of stochastic differential equations and the validity of the diffusion approximation for mass-action kinetics; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The diffusion approximation accurately captures the law of the underlying continuous-time Markov chain for the networks considered.
    Invoked when equating identifiability of the SDE to identifiability of the reaction rates.
  • standard math Standard existence and uniqueness results for SDEs with Lipschitz coefficients hold for the reaction-rate functions under study.
    Background assumption required for the law of the diffusion process to be well-defined.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5656 in / 1494 out tokens · 45138 ms · 2026-05-22T16:28:39.911342+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. A Call to Lagrangian Action: Learning Population Mechanics from Temporal Snapshots

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Wasserstein Lagrangian Mechanics learns second-order population dynamics from observed marginal snapshots without specifying the Lagrangian and outperforms gradient flow methods on tasks like vortex dynamics and embry...

  2. A Call to Lagrangian Action: Learning Population Mechanics from Temporal Snapshots

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Wasserstein Lagrangian Mechanics learns second-order population dynamics from observed marginals without specifying the Lagrangian and outperforms gradient flow methods on periodic dynamics like vortex motion and flocking.

  3. A Call to Lagrangian Action: Learning Population Mechanics from Temporal Snapshots

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Wasserstein Lagrangian Mechanics formalizes second-order dynamics in Wasserstein space and provides an algorithm to learn them from observed marginals without specifying the Lagrangian, outperforming gradient flows on...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Tom´ as Alarc´ on and Karen M Page,Stochastic models of the VEGF receptor and its role in cancer therapy, J. R. Soc. Interface4(2007), no. 13, 283–304

    work page 2007

  2. [2]

    Anderson, Daniele Cappelletti, Masanori Koyama, and Thomas G

    David F. Anderson, Daniele Cappelletti, Masanori Koyama, and Thomas G. Kurtz,Non-explosivity of stochastically modeled reaction networks that are complex balanced, Bull. Math. Biol.80(2018), no. 10, 2561–2579. MR 3856989

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Anderson, Gheorghe Craciun, and Thomas G

    David F. Anderson, Gheorghe Craciun, and Thomas G. Kurtz,Product-form stationary distributions for deficiency zero chemical reaction networks, Bul. Math. Biol.72(2010), 1947–1970

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Anderson, Desmond J

    David F. Anderson, Desmond J. Higham, Saul C. Leite, and Ruth J. Williams,On constrained Langevin equations and (bio)chemical reaction networks, Multiscale Model. Simul.17(2019), no. 1, 1–30

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Stochastics in Biological Systems, vol

    David F Anderson and Thomas G Kurtz,Stochastic analysis of biochemical systems, Mathematical Biosciences Institute Lecture Series. Stochastics in Biological Systems, vol. 1.2, Springer, Cham; MBI Mathematical Biosciences Institute, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2015

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Emmanuel Barillot, Laurence Calzone, Philippe Hupe, Jean-Philippe Vert, and Andrei Zinovyev,Computational systems biology of cancer, CRC Press Boca Raton, FL, 2013

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    169, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997

    Rajendra Bhatia,Matrix analysis, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 169, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997

    work page 1997

  8. [8]

    Browning, David J

    Alexander P. Browning, David J. Warne, Kevin Burrage, Ruth E. Baker, and Matthew J. Simpson,Identifiability analysis for stochastic differential equation models in systems biology, J. R. Soc. Interface17(2020), no. 173, 20200652

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    Gheorghe Craciun,Toric differential inclusions and a proof of the global attractor conjecture, arXiv:1501.02860 (2015)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  10. [10]

    Gheorghe Craciun and Casian Pantea,Identifiability of chemical reaction networks, J. Math. Chem.44(2008), no. 1, 244–259

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    Gheorghe Craciun, Yangzhong Tang, and Martin Feinberg,Understanding bistability in complex enzyme-driven reaction networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA103(2006), 8697–8702

    work page 2006

  12. [12]

    German Enciso, Radek Erban, and Jinsu Kim,Identifiability of stochastically modelled reaction networks, European J. Appl. Math.32 (2021), no. 5, 865–887

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Ethier and Thomas G

    Stewart N. Ethier and Thomas G. Kurtz,Markov processes, Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics: Probability and Mathematical Statistics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2009, Characterization and convergence

    work page 2009

  14. [14]

    202, Springer, Cham, 2019

    Martin Feinberg,Foundations of chemical reaction network theory, Applied Mathematical Sciences, vol. 202, Springer, Cham, 2019

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    A.471(2015), no

    Elisenda Feliu,Injectivity, multiple zeros and multistationarity in reaction networks, Proc. A.471(2015), no. 2173, 20140530, 18

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    William Feller,Diffusion processes in one dimension, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.77(1954), 1–31

    work page 1954

  17. [17]

    Fontanil and Eduardo R

    Lauro L. Fontanil and Eduardo R. Mendoza,Common complexes of decompositions and complex balanced equilibria of chemical reaction networks, MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem.87(2022), no. 2, 329–366

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    Gillespie,A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evolution of coupled chemical reactions, J

    D. Gillespie,A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evolution of coupled chemical reactions, J. Comput. Phys. 22(1976), no. 4, 403–434

    work page 1976

  19. [19]

    ,Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions, J. Chem. Phys.81(1977), no. 25, 2340–2361

    work page 1977

  20. [20]

    Gorban and Gregory S

    Alexander N. Gorban and Gregory S. Yablonsky,Three waves of chemical dynamics, Math. Model. Nat. Phenom.10(2015), no. 5, 1–5

    work page 2015

  21. [21]

    Goutsias and Garrett Jenkinson,Markovian dynamics on complex reaction networks, Phys

    John K. Goutsias and Garrett Jenkinson,Markovian dynamics on complex reaction networks, Phys. Rep.529(2013), no. 2, 199–264

    work page 2013

  22. [22]

    Elizabeth Gross, Heather Harrington, Nicolette Meshkat, and Anne Shiu,Linear compartmental models: Input-output equations and operations that preserve identifiability, SIAM J. Appl. Math.79(2019), no. 4, 1423–1447

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Grunberg and Domitilla Del Vecchio,Identifiability of chemical reaction networks with intrinsic and extrinsic noise from stationary distributions, SIAM J

    Theodore W. Grunberg and Domitilla Del Vecchio,Identifiability of chemical reaction networks with intrinsic and extrinsic noise from stationary distributions, SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst.22(2023), no. 3, 2206–2241

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    18 LOUIS FAUL 1, LINARD HOESSLY 2, PANQIU XIA 3

    Reinhart Heinrich and Stefan Schuster,The regulation of cellular systems, Springer New York, NY, 1996. 18 LOUIS FAUL 1, LINARD HOESSLY 2, PANQIU XIA 3

    work page 1996

  25. [25]

    2, 303–325

    Linard Hoessly, Carsten Wiuf, and Panqiu Xia,On the sum of chemical reactions, European Journal of Applied Mathematics34(2023), no. 2, 303–325

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    Friedrich J. M. Horn and Roy Jackson,General mass action kinetics, Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal.47(1972), 81–116

    work page 1972

  27. [27]

    Iacus,Simulation and inference for stochastic differential equations, Springer Series in Statistics, Springer, New York, 2008, With R examples

    Stefano M. Iacus,Simulation and inference for stochastic differential equations, Springer Series in Statistics, Springer, New York, 2008, With R examples. MR 2410254

    work page 2008

  28. [28]

    24, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam; Kodansha, Ltd., Tokyo, 1989

    Nobuyuki Ikeda and Shinzo Watanabe,Stochastic differential equations and diffusion processes, second ed., North-Holland Mathematical Library, vol. 24, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam; Kodansha, Ltd., Tokyo, 1989. MR 1011252

    work page 1989

  29. [29]

    Johnston and David Siegel,Linear conjugacy of chemical reaction networks, J

    Matthew D. Johnston and David Siegel,Linear conjugacy of chemical reaction networks, J. Math. Chem.49(2011), no. 7, 1263–1282

    work page 2011

  30. [30]

    Johnston, David Siegel, and G´ abor Szederk´ enyi,A linear programming approach to weak reversibility and linear conjugacy of chemical reaction networks, J

    Matthew D. Johnston, David Siegel, and G´ abor Szederk´ enyi,A linear programming approach to weak reversibility and linear conjugacy of chemical reaction networks, J. Math. Chem.50(2012), no. 1, 274–288

    work page 2012

  31. [31]

    Biosci.241(2013), no

    ,Computing weakly reversible linearly conjugate chemical reaction networks with minimal deficiency, Math. Biosci.241(2013), no. 1, 88–98

    work page 2013

  32. [32]

    Khas’minski ˘ ı,Ergodic properties of recurrent diffusion processes and stabilization of the solution of the Cauchy problem for parabolic equations, Teor

    Rafail Z. Khas’minski ˘ ı,Ergodic properties of recurrent diffusion processes and stabilization of the solution of the Cauchy problem for parabolic equations, Teor. Verojatnost. i Primenen.5(1960), 196–214

    work page 1960

  33. [33]

    Costa, David A

    Micha l Komorowski, Maria J. Costa, David A. Rand, and Michael P. H. Stumpf,Sensitivity, robustness, and identifiability in stochastic chemical kinetics models, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA108(2011), no. 21, 8645–8650

    work page 2011

  34. [34]

    Krambeck,The mathematical structure of chemical kinetics in homogeneous single-phase systems, Arch

    Frederick J. Krambeck,The mathematical structure of chemical kinetics in homogeneous single-phase systems, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal.38(1970), no. 5, 317–347

    work page 1970

  35. [35]

    Kurtz,Limit theorems and diffusion approximations for density dependent Markov chains, Math

    Thomas G. Kurtz,Limit theorems and diffusion approximations for density dependent Markov chains, Math. Programming Stud. (1976), no. 5, 67–78

    work page 1976

  36. [36]

    Appl.6(1977/78), no

    ,Strong approximation theorems for density dependent Markov chains, Stochastic Process. Appl.6(1977/78), no. 3, 223–240

    work page 1977

  37. [37]

    36, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 1981

    ,Approximation of population processes, CBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics, vol. 36, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 1981

    work page 1981

  38. [38]

    ,Equivalence of stochastic equations and martingale problems, Stochastic analysis 2010, Springer, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 113–130

    work page 2010

  39. [39]

    Lucie Laurence and Philippe Robert,Analysis of stochastic chemical reaction networks with a hierarchy of timescales, J. Stat. Phys.192 (2025), no. 3, Paper No. 39

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    Leite and Ruth J

    Saul C. Leite and Ruth J. Williams,A constrained langevin approximation for chemical reaction networks, Ann. Appl. Probab.29(2019), no. 3, 1541–1608

    work page 2019

  41. [41]

    May,Qualitative stability in model ecosystems, Ecology54(1973), no

    Robert M. May,Qualitative stability in model ecosystems, Ecology54(1973), no. 3, 638–641

    work page 1973

  42. [42]

    Christian Mazza and Michel Bena ¨ ım,Stochastic dynamics for systems biology, Chapman & Hall/CRC Mathematical and Computational Biology Series, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2014

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    McQuarrie,Stochastic approach to chemical kinetics, J

    Donald A. McQuarrie,Stochastic approach to chemical kinetics, J. Appl. Probab.4(1967), 413–478

    work page 1967

  44. [44]

    Menten,Die kinetik der invertinwirkung, Biochem

    Leonor Michaelis and Maud L. Menten,Die kinetik der invertinwirkung, Biochem. Z.49(1913), no. 333-369, 352

    work page 1913

  45. [45]

    B. S. Mityagin,The zero set of a real analytic function, Mat. Zametki107(2020), no. 3, 473–475. MR 4070868

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Nazareno, Raymond Paul L

    Allen L. Nazareno, Raymond Paul L. Eclarin, Eduardo R. Mendoza, and Angelyn R. Lao,Linear conjugacy of chemical kinetic systems., Math. Biosci. Eng.16(2019), no. 6, 8322–8355

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    Novozhilov, Georgy P

    Artem S. Novozhilov, Georgy P. Karev, and Eugene V. Koonin,Biological applications of the theory of birth-and-death processes, Brief. Bioinform.7(2006), no. 1, 70–85

    work page 2006

  48. [48]

    Bernt Øksendal,Stochastic differential equations, sixth ed., Universitext, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003, An introduction with applications

    work page 2003

  49. [49]

    Beatriz Pascual-Escudero and Linard Hoessly,An algebraic approach to product-form stationary distributions for some reaction networks, SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst.21(2022), no. 1, 588–615

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    7, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001

    Lawrence Perko,Differential equations and dynamical systems, third ed., Texts in Applied Mathematics, vol. 7, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001

    work page 2001

  51. [51]

    California, Berkeley, Calif., 1970/1971), Vol

    Daniel W Stroock and Srinivasa RS Varadhan,On the support of diffusion processes with applications to the strong maximum principle, Proceedings of the Sixth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (Univ. California, Berkeley, Calif., 1970/1971), Vol. III: Probability theory, Univ. California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1972, pp. 333–359

    work page 1970

  52. [52]

    Swart,A 2-dimensional SDE whose solutions are not unique, Electron

    Jan M. Swart,A 2-dimensional SDE whose solutions are not unique, Electron. Comm. Probab.6(2001), 67–71

    work page 2001

  53. [53]

    Identifiability of chemical reaction networks

    G´ abor Szederk´ enyi,Comment on “Identifiability of chemical reaction networks” by G. Craciun and C. Pantea, J. Math. Chem.45(2009), no. 4, 1172–1174

    work page 2009

  54. [54]

    Gillespie,The chemical Langevin equation, J

    Daniel T. Gillespie,The chemical Langevin equation, J. Chem. Phys.115(2000), no. 1, 297–306

    work page 2000

  55. [55]

    Mukund Thattai and Alexander Van Oudenaarden,Intrinsic noise in gene regulatory networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA98(2001), no. 15, 8614–8619. IDENTIFIABILITY OF SDES FOR RNS 19

    work page 2001

  56. [56]

    Philipp Thomas, Arthur V. Straube, and Ramon Grima,The slow-scale linear noise approximation: an accurate, reduced stochastic description of biochemical networks under timescale separation conditions, BMC Syst. Biol., no. 1, 39

    work page

  57. [57]

    N. G. van Kampen,A power series expansion of the master equation, Canad. J. Phys.39(1961), 551–567. MR 128921

    work page 1961

  58. [58]

    8, 849–906

    Rud Wegscheider, ¨Uber simultane gleichgewichte und die beziehungen zwischen thermodynamik und reactionskinetik homogener systeme, Monatshefte f¨ ur Chemie und verwandte Teile anderer Wissenschaften22(1901), no. 8, 849–906

    work page 1901

  59. [59]

    14, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1983, The Dynamics of Interacting Populations

    Wolfgang Weidlich and G¨ unter Haag,Concepts and models of a quantitative sociology, Springer Series in Synergetics, vol. 14, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1983, The Dynamics of Interacting Populations

    work page 1983

  60. [60]

    Wilkinson,Stochastic modelling for systems biology, Chapman & Hall/CRC Mathematical and Computational Biology Series, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2006

    Darren J. Wilkinson,Stochastic modelling for systems biology, Chapman & Hall/CRC Mathematical and Computational Biology Series, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2006

    work page 2006

  61. [61]

    Toshio Yamada and Shinzo Watanabe,On the uniqueness of solutions of stochastic differential equations, J. Math. Kyoto Univ.11 (1971), 155–167

    work page 1971