pith. sign in

arxiv: 2306.08261 · v3 · submitted 2023-06-14 · 💻 cs.DM · q-bio.MN· q-bio.QM

Strong regulatory graphs

Patric Gustafsson , Ion Petre This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 08:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.DM q-bio.MNq-bio.QM
keywords strong regulationlogical modelingregulatory graphsphenotype attractorsambiguous statesbiological networksupdate functionsattractors
0
0 comments X

The pith

Strong regulation in logical networks sets a vertex to ambiguous unless all predecessors agree on its influence.

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

The paper introduces strong regulation to reduce the effort of specifying a full update function for every vertex in a logical model. Under this rule a vertex becomes active or inactive only when every predecessor exerts the same influence; disagreement leaves the vertex ambiguous. The authors establish that phenotype attractors continue to exist, consisting of states in which some variables are fixed while the others may take any value including ambiguous. A reader would care because the approach targets the main obstacle to building large logical models of biological systems without discarding the dynamical features those models are meant to capture.

Core claim

In a strong regulatory graph a vertex is updated to an active or inactive state only if all its predecessors agree in their influences; otherwise the vertex is set to ambiguous. The paper shows that such graphs admit phenotype attractors in which the status of a designated subset of variables is fixed to active or inactive while every other variable may assume any status, including ambiguous.

What carries the argument

Strong regulation: the update rule that requires unanimous predecessor influence for a definite active or inactive state and produces ambiguity on any disagreement.

If this is right

  • Phenotype attractors remain identifiable even when some variables are fixed and the rest may be ambiguous.
  • The need to define a separate Boolean function for each vertex is removed.
  • The interplay among active, inactive, and ambiguous influences can be studied directly on the graph structure.
  • Logical models of biological networks can be constructed at larger scale while retaining attractor analysis.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Ambiguous states might serve as a compact representation of conflicting regulatory signals in real cells.
  • Existing logical models could be re-expressed under strong regulation to test whether the same phenotypes are recovered with less manual effort.
  • The framework invites extensions that assign probabilities or priorities to the three possible states.

Load-bearing premise

The main barrier to scaling logical models is the requirement to write an explicit update function for each vertex from its predecessors, and that replacing those functions with the strong-regulation rule preserves useful dynamical properties.

What would settle it

A strong regulatory graph containing a set of fixed active or inactive variables for which no phenotype attractor exists would falsify the existence claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2306.08261 by Ion Petre, Patric Gustafsson.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Two simple regulatory graphs [16]. The vertices are shown with rectangles, the activation edges [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The state transition graphs of the regulatory graphs in Example 2.3 and Figure 1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The MAPK-PI3K/AKT signaling pathways [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The basins of attractors of the state transition graph of the MAPK-PI3K/AKT model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Logical modeling is a powerful tool in biology, offering a system-level understanding of the complex interactions that govern biological processes. A gap that hinders the scalability of logical models is the need to specify the update function of every vertex in the network depending on the status of its predecessors. To address this, we introduce in this paper the concept of strong regulation, where a vertex is only updated to active/inactive if all its predecessors agree in their influences; otherwise, it is set to ambiguous. We explore the interplay between active, inactive, and ambiguous influences in a network. We discuss the existence of phenotype attractors in such networks, where the status of some of the variables is fixed to active/inactive, while the others can have an arbitrary status, including ambiguous.

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

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the concept of strong regulation in logical networks, where a vertex updates to active or inactive only if all predecessors agree in their influences; otherwise the vertex is set to ambiguous. It explores the interplay of active, inactive, and ambiguous states and discusses the existence of phenotype attractors in which some variables are fixed while others remain arbitrary (including ambiguous).

Significance. If the definition can be shown to preserve biologically relevant dynamical properties while reducing the need to specify per-vertex update functions, the approach would address a recognized scalability bottleneck in logical modeling. The current text, however, supplies only the definition and a high-level claim about attractors, with no examples, formal statements, or validation, so the practical significance cannot yet be assessed.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the manuscript states that it 'discusses the existence of phenotype attractors' yet supplies neither a formal definition of these attractors, nor any example network, nor any argument or proof establishing their existence. Because this discussion is presented as the main application of the new definition, the absence of supporting material is load-bearing for the central claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed review and for highlighting the need for more concrete support around phenotype attractors. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the manuscript states that it 'discusses the existence of phenotype attractors' yet supplies neither a formal definition of these attractors, nor any example network, nor any argument or proof establishing their existence. Because this discussion is presented as the main application of the new definition, the absence of supporting material is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that the current version of the manuscript introduces the strong-regulation definition and then offers only a high-level claim about phenotype attractors without supplying a formal definition, an illustrative network, or any argument establishing their existence. This omission weakens the central application claim. In the revised manuscript we will (i) give a precise definition of a phenotype attractor under strong regulation, (ii) include at least one small example network together with its attractor computation, and (iii) provide a short argument (or proof sketch) showing that such attractors exist under the stated conditions. These additions will be placed in a new dedicated section following the definition of strong regulation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; definitional introduction with independent discussion

full rationale

The paper's core contribution is the introduction of the strong-regulation concept (update only on unanimous predecessor influence, else ambiguous) and a discussion of phenotype attractors with fixed vs. arbitrary statuses. No equations, fitted parameters, or predictions appear in the provided abstract or description. No self-citations are invoked as load-bearing justifications for uniqueness or ansatzes. The derivation chain is self-contained as a new definition plus exploratory properties, with no reduction of outputs to inputs by construction. This matches the default expectation for non-circular papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract identifies no free parameters, background axioms, or invented entities beyond the newly introduced definition of strong regulation itself.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5650 in / 1041 out tokens · 27379 ms · 2026-05-24T08:46:05.274814+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Boolean network modeling in systems pharmacology

    Bloomingdale P, Nguyen V A, Niu J, Mager DE. Boolean network modeling in systems pharmacology. Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, 2018. 45(1):159–180. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10928-017-9567-4. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-017-9567-4 . 312 P . Gustafsson and I. Petre/ Strong Regulatory Graphs

    work page doi:10.1007/s10928-017-9567-4 2018

  2. [2]

    Chapter Seven - Logical modeling of cell fate specification- Application to T cell commitment

    Cacace E, Collombet S, Thieffry D. Chapter Seven - Logical modeling of cell fate specification- Application to T cell commitment. In: Peter IS (ed.), Gene Regulatory Networks, volume 139 of Cur- rent Topics in Developmental Biology, pp. 205–238. Academic Press, 2020. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/ bs.ctdb.2020.02.008. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.ctdb.2020.02.008

    work page doi:10.1016/bs.ctdb.2020.02.008 2020

  3. [3]

    Patient-specific Boolean models of signalling networks guide personalised treatments

    Montagud A, Béal J, Tobalina L, Traynard P, Subramanian V , Szalai B, Alföldi R, Puskás L, Valencia A, Barillot E, Saez-Rodriguez J, Calzone L. Patient-specific Boolean models of signalling networks guide personalised treatments. eLife, 2022. 11:e72626. doi:https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72626. URL https: //doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72626

    work page doi:10.7554/elife.72626 2022

  4. [4]

    Boolean model of growth signaling, cell cycle and apoptosis predicts the molecular mechanism of aberrant cell cycle progression driven by hyperactive PI3K

    Sizek H, Hamel A, Deritei D, Campbell S, Ravasz Regan E. Boolean model of growth signaling, cell cycle and apoptosis predicts the molecular mechanism of aberrant cell cycle progression driven by hyperactive PI3K. PLOS Computational Biology, 2019. 15(3):1–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006402. URL https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006402

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006402 2019

  5. [5]

    Dynamical Boolean Modeling of Immunogenic Cell Death

    Checcoli A, Pol JG, Naldi A, Noel V , Barillot E, Kroemer G, Thieffry D, Calzone L, Stoll G. Dynamical Boolean Modeling of Immunogenic Cell Death. Frontiers in Physiology, 2020. 11. doi:https://doi.org/10. 3389/fphys.2020.590479. URL https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2020.590479

    work page doi:10.3389/fphys.2020.590479 2020

  6. [6]

    Boolean modeling in systems biology: an overview of methodol- ogy and applications

    Wang RS, Saadatpour A, Albert R. Boolean modeling in systems biology: an overview of methodol- ogy and applications. Physical Biology, 2012. 9(5):055001. doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/1478-3975/9/5/ 055001. URL https://doi.org/10.1088/1478-3975/9/5/055001

    work page doi:10.1088/1478-3975/9/5/ 2012

  7. [7]

    KEGG as a reference resource for gene and protein annotation

    Kanehisa M, Sato Y , Kawashima M, Furumichi M, Tanabe M. KEGG as a reference resource for gene and protein annotation. Nucleic Acids Research, 2015. 44(D1):D457–D462. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/ gkv1070. URL https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv1070

    work page doi:10.1093/nar/ 2015

  8. [8]

    OmniPath: guidelines and gateway for literature-curated sig- naling pathway resources

    Türei D, Korcsmáros T, Saez-Rodriguez J. OmniPath: guidelines and gateway for literature-curated sig- naling pathway resources. Nature Methods, 2016. 13:966–967. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4077

    work page doi:10.1038/nmeth.4077 2016

  9. [9]

    InnateDB: systems biology of innate immunity and beyond–recent updates and continuing curation

    Breuer K, Foroushani AK, Laird MR, Chen C, Sribnaia A, Lo R, Winsor GL, Hancock REW, Brinkman FSL, Lynn DJ. InnateDB: systems biology of innate immunity and beyond–recent updates and continuing curation. Nucleic Acids Research, 2013. 41(Database issue):D1228–D1233. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ nar/gks1147

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    SIGNOR 2.0, the SIGnaling Network Open Resource 2.0: 2019 update

    Licata L, Lo Surdo P, Iannuccelli M, Palma A, Micarelli E, Perfetto L, Peluso D, Calderone A, Castagnoli L, Cesareni G. SIGNOR 2.0, the SIGnaling Network Open Resource 2.0: 2019 update. Nucleic Acids Research, 2020. 48(D1):D504–D510. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz949

    work page doi:10.1093/nar/gkz949 2019

  11. [11]

    DrugBank 5.0: a major update to the DrugBank database for 2018

    Wishart DS, Feunang YD, Guo AC, Lo EJ, Marcu A, Grant JR, Sajed T, Johnson D, Li C, Sayeeda Z, Assempour N, Iynkkaran I, Liu Y , Maciejewski A, Gale N, Wilson A, Chin L, Cummings R, Le D, Pon A, Knox C, Wilson M. DrugBank 5.0: a major update to the DrugBank database for 2018. Nucleic Acids Research, 2017. 46(D1):D1074–D1082. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/na...

    work page doi:10.1093/nar/gkx1037 2018

  12. [12]

    Network analytics for drug repurposing in COVID-19

    Siminea N, Popescu V , Sanchez Martin JA, Florea D, Gavril G, Gheorghe AM, It ˛cus ˛ C, Kanhaiya K, Pacioglu O, Popa LI, Trandafir R, Tusa MI, Sidoroff M, P ˘aun M, Czeizler E, P ˘aun A, Petre I. Network analytics for drug repurposing in COVID-19. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 2021. 23(1). doi:https://doi.org/ 10.1093/bib/bbab490. Bbab490, URL https://doi....

    work page doi:10.1093/bib/bbab490 2021

  13. [13]

    Network controllability solutions for com- putational drug repurposing using genetic algorithms

    Popescu VB, Kanhaiya K, N ˘astac DI, Czeizler E, Petre I. Network controllability solutions for com- putational drug repurposing using genetic algorithms. Scientific Reports, 2022. 12(1):1437. doi:https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05335-3. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05335-3 . P . Gustafsson and I. Petre/ Strong Regulatory Graphs 313

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-022-05335-3 2022

  14. [14]

    Discrete dynamic network modeling of oncogenic signal- ing: Mechanistic insights for personalized treatment of cancer

    Zañudo GT J, Steinway SN, Albert R. Discrete dynamic network modeling of oncogenic signal- ing: Mechanistic insights for personalized treatment of cancer. Current Opinion in Systems Biol- ogy, 2018. 9:1–10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coisb.2018.02.002. Mathematic modelling, URL https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.coisb.2018.02.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.coisb.2018.02.002 2018

  15. [15]

    Boolean threshold networks: Virtues and limita- tions for biological modeling

    Zanudo JG, Aldana M, Martínez-Mekler G. Boolean threshold networks: Virtues and limita- tions for biological modeling. In: Information Processing and Biological Systems, pp. 113–151. Springer, 2011. doi:{https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19621-8_6}. URL https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-642-19621-8_6

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19621-8_6 2011

  16. [16]

    Decision Diagrams for the Representation and Analysis of Logical Mod- els of Genetic Networks

    Naldi A, Thieffry D, Chaouiya C. Decision Diagrams for the Representation and Analysis of Logical Mod- els of Genetic Networks. In: Calder M, Gilmore S (eds.), Computational Methods in Systems Biology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-540-75140-3, 2007 pp. 233–247. doi:https: //doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75140-3_16. URL https://do...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-75140-3_16 2007

  17. [17]

    Structural target controlability of linear net- works

    Czeizler E, Gratie C, Chiu WK, Kanhaiya K, Petre I. Structural target controlability of linear net- works. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics , 2018. 15(4):1217 – 1228. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2018.2797271. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB. 2018.2797271

    work page doi:10.1109/tcbb.2018.2797271 2018

  18. [18]

    Controllability of reaction systems

    Ivanov S, Petre I. Controllability of reaction systems. Journal of Membrane Computing , 2020. 7:290 —- 302. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s41965-020-00055-x. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41965-020-00055-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s41965-020-00055-x 2020

  19. [19]

    Regulatory networks seen as asynchronous automata: a logical description

    Thomas R. Regulatory networks seen as asynchronous automata: a logical description. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1991. 153(1):1–23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80350-9. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80350-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0022-5193(05)80350-9 1991

  20. [20]

    Dynamical behaviour of biological regulatory networks—I

    Thomas R, Thieffry D, Kaufman M. Dynamical behaviour of biological regulatory networks—I. Bi- ological role of feedback loops and practical use of the concept of the loop-characteristic state. Bul- letin of Mathematical Biology , 1995. 57(2):247–276. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02460618. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02460618

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02460618 1995

  21. [21]

    Qualitative Analysis of Regulatory Graphs: A Compu- tational Tool Based on a Discrete Formal Framework

    Chaouiya C, Remy E, Mossé B, Thieffry D. Qualitative Analysis of Regulatory Graphs: A Compu- tational Tool Based on a Discrete Formal Framework. In: Benvenuti L, De Santis A, Farina L (eds.), Positive Systems. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-540-44928-7, 2003 pp. 119–126. doi:http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-44928-7_17. URL http...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-44928-7_17 2003

  22. [22]

    Basins of Attraction, Commitment Sets, and Phenotypes of Boolean Networks

    Klarner H, Heinitz F, Nee S, Siebert H. Basins of Attraction, Commitment Sets, and Phenotypes of Boolean Networks. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinformatics, 2020. 17(4):1115–1124. doi:https: //doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2018.2879097. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2018.2879097

    work page doi:10.1109/tcbb.2018.2879097 2020

  23. [23]

    Controlling Directed Protein Interaction Networks in Cancer

    Kanhaiya K, Czeizler E, Gratie C, Petre I. Controlling Directed Protein Interaction Networks in Cancer. Scientific Reports, 2017. 7(1):10327. doi:https://10.1038/s41598-017-10491-y. URL https://10.1038/ s41598-017-10491-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10491-y 2017

  24. [24]

    Control in Boolean Networks With Model Checking

    Cifuentes-Fontanals L, Tonello E, Siebert H. Control in Boolean Networks With Model Checking. Fron- tiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 2022. 8. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2022.838546. URL https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2022.838546. 314 P . Gustafsson and I. Petre/ Strong Regulatory Graphs

    work page doi:10.3389/fams.2022.838546 2022

  25. [25]

    Targeting Alterations in the RAF–MEK Pathway

    Yaeger R, Corcoran RB. Targeting Alterations in the RAF–MEK Pathway. Cancer Discovery, 2019. 9(3):329–341. doi:https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-1321. URL https://doi.org/10.1158/ 2159-8290.CD-18-1321

    work page doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-18-1321 2019

  26. [26]

    The MAPK pathway across different malignancies: A new perspective

    Burotto M, Chiou VL, Lee JM, Kohn EC. The MAPK pathway across different malignancies: A new perspective. Cancer, 2014. 120(22):3446–3456. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28864. URL https: //doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28864

    work page doi:10.1002/cncr.28864 2014

  27. [27]

    MAP kinase signalling pathways in cancer

    Dhillon A, Hagan S, Rath O, Kolch W. MAP kinase signalling pathways in cancer. Oncogene, 2007. 26:3279–3290. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1210421

    work page doi:10.1038/sj.onc.1210421 2007

  28. [28]

    Targeting PI3K in cancer: mechanisms and advances in clinical trials

    Yang J, Nie J, Ma X, Wei Y , Peng Y , Wei X. Targeting PI3K in cancer: mechanisms and advances in clinical trials. Mol Cancer, 2019. 18(26). doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-019-0954-x

    work page doi:10.1186/s12943-019-0954-x 2019

  29. [29]

    TTargeting PI3K/Akt signal trans- duction for cancer therapy

    He Y , Sun MM, Zhang GG, Yang J, Chen KS, Xu WW, Li B. TTargeting PI3K/Akt signal trans- duction for cancer therapy. Sig Transduct Target Ther , 2021. 6(425). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41392-021-00828-5

    work page 2021