Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 65 references

Automatic partitioning for the low-rank integration of stochastic Boolean reaction networks

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a good partition for dynamical low-rank simulation of a Boolean reaction network is one whose severed reaction pathways carry little information, and that this partition can be chosen automatically by picking the…

desk verdict Worth refereeing: a genuinely useful automatic partitioning heuristic for DLR Boolean-network simulation, with honest numerical evidence, but the entropy criterion's uniform-state assumption is a real soft spot. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04157 v1 pith:XALDDJ6X submitted 2025-01-07 math.NA cs.NAphysics.bio-phphysics.comp-ph

Lukas Einkemmer , Julian Mangott , Martina Prugger This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NAphysics.bio-phphysics.comp-ph MSC 65F55
keywords Booleanreactionnetworksdynamicallow-rankapproximationchemicalmasterequationgraphpartitioningKernighan-Linalgorithminformationentropytreetensor
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that the accuracy of dynamical low-rank (DLR) simulations of stochastic Boolean reaction networks depends strongly on how the species are partitioned, and that this choice can be automated. It proposes a two-step preprocessing heuristic: generate a pool of balanced candidate partitions with the Kernighan-Lin graph algorithm, then select the partition with the lowest Shannon information entropy, a rule-by-rule measure of how much information is lost when a reaction pathway crosses a partition boundary. The pay-off, measured on three biochemical networks, is that the entropy-selected partition reaches a given accuracy with a smaller rank than human-expert partitions or partitions that merely minimize the number of cut pathways. If the claim holds, automatic partitioning removes a manual bottleneck and makes low-rank simulation practical for exploring many candidate network models.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the rule-specific information entropy $h_i$ defined in Eqs. (6)-(8). For each Boolean rule $B_i$ that updates species $S_i$, and for each value $x_i$ of the species on which the rule directly depends, the scheme computes the fraction $p_i(x_i)$ of states in the complementary partition for which the rule would fire, and then takes the binary Shannon entropy of that fraction: $h_i$ is the average over all $x_i$. The total entropy $H$ is the sum of the $h_i$ over all species. The Kernighan-Lin algorithm supplies the candidate pool of balanced partitions with few reaction-pathway cuts, and $H$ is then used to pick the partition whose approximated pathways lose the least information; pathways that are logically redundant (e.g., an absorption-law rule) cost zero entropy, while a complete logical dependence costs one.

What would settle it

Take the pancreatic cancer model, generate a large Kernighan-Lin pool, and run DLR for the ten lowest- and ten highest-entropy partitions; if any higher-entropy partition requires a lower rank than a lower-entropy partition to reach the same error in the first moments, the uniform-counting assumption behind Eq. (8) is violated in that regime. A more direct test would compare the ranking predicted by uniform-counting entropy with a ranking computed using the actual time-marginal distribution of the complementary partition at the simulation end time.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that cut count is the wrong objective for partitioning Boolean reaction networks in DLR methods. A partition should instead sever reaction pathways that carry little information, and the rule-specific Shannon entropy of Eqs. (6)-(8) quantifies exactly that: a rule whose output is completely determined by the state of the other partition contributes entropy one, a logically redundant rule contributes zero, and partial dependencies contribute intermediate values. The paper shows numerically that choosing the minimal-entropy partition from a Kernighan-Lin pool yields a DLR approximation that is more accurate at fixed rank---and equivalently needs a lower rank for a fixed error---than both the manual partitions previously used in the literature and the minimal-cut partition, in single-level and hierarchical tree tensor network settings.

Load-bearing premise

The entropy score in Eqs. (6)-(8) assumes that, for each fixed value of the species a rule directly depends on, all states of the complementary partition are equally likely; if the true probability distribution over those states is far from uniform, the entropy ranking may not reflect the rank the DLR approximation actually needs.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a fixed rank, the automatically selected partition yields a lower error, and for a fixed error it permits a smaller rank, cutting memory by roughly the ratio of the ranks---about fourfold when moving from $r=20$ to $r=5$ in the pancreatic cancer example.
  • The preprocessing cost is negligible compared with a single DLR time integration: generating and scoring a pool of thousands of partitions for the 41-species apoptosis network takes tens of seconds on a laptop.
  • The same selection scheme carries over to hierarchical tree tensor network decompositions, so the method scales to networks whose single partitions would still be too large to store exactly.
  • Because the entropy is computed directly from truth tables, the scheme needs no expert knowledge of the network and can be rerun automatically whenever a network topology changes, which matters for model inference pipelines.
  • The numerical experiments make the accuracy difference visible: among one-level partitions of the mTOR network, the worst partition is about two orders of magnitude less accurate than the best at fixed rank.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An untested implication is that the uniform-counting assumption in Eq. (8) could be relaxed cheaply: using a short stochastic simulation or a steady-state estimate of the marginal distribution over the complementary partition would likely sharpen the entropy ranking for regimes where the distribution is far from uniform.
  • The entropy score could be folded back into the graph weights before running Kernighan-Lin, as the authors note in their outlook; that would let the heuristic directly minimize information loss instead of only generating candidates that are then re-ranked.
  • A practical extension would be to weight the per-rule entropies by rule probabilities for probabilistic Boolean networks, which is straightforward because the entropy is already defined per rule; the paper mentions this but does not test it.
  • The rank-versus-entropy monotonicity observed in the experiments suggests a cheap model-selection tool: in parameter inference, where many network variants must be simulated, ranking partitions by $H$ may predict which models are simulable at low rank before any DLR run is attempted.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The authors propose a preprocessing heuristic for choosing the bipartition (and hierarchical tree partition) of a Boolean reaction network for dynamical low-rank (DLR) approximation of the master equation. Candidate partitions are generated by repeated Kernighan-Lin runs, and each candidate is scored by a rule-specific Shannon entropy H (Eqs. (6)-(9)) that measures information lost when a reaction pathway crosses the partition boundary; the lowest-H partition is selected. The scheme is tested on three biological models (mTOR with 22 species, pancreatic cancer with 34 species, and apoptosis with 41 species) for both one-level and hierarchical decompositions, and the authors report that the entropy-guided choice outperforms both manual literature partitions and pure cut-minimizing partitions.

Significance. If the entropy proxy is reliable, the method is a cheap and useful preprocessing step for an existing DLR simulation pipeline; the hierarchical extension appears new, and the reported preprocessing overhead is negligible (Table 3). The paper is clearly written, and the numerical experiments span a reasonable range of model sizes. However, the central proxy (uniform-distribution entropy) is not directly validated against the actual time-dependent distribution that governs the DLR rank, and the two largest benchmarks use DLR reference solutions rather than exact or independent stochastic references. The claim of superiority to human-expert partitions currently rests on a single direct comparison (one-level pancreatic cancer). While the paper does not ship code, the algorithm is straightforward enough to reproduce from the description.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (6)-(8)] The rule-specific entropy h_i averages the binary entropy over a uniform distribution on the complementary partition states in Eq. (8). Because the DLR approximation error is governed by the actual master-equation distribution P(t,x), the uniform proxy may rank partitions incorrectly: a rule with large h_i may act only on states of negligible probability, and vice versa. The paper does not test whether the H-ordering matches the ordering induced by P(t,x). Figure 6 itself shows that the lowest-entropy partition (M11) is not the most accurate at any rank, and at r=8 two higher-entropy partitions (M4, PURPLE) beat it; the text acknowledges this in Section 5.1.1 ('a smaller entropy does not automatically yield better accuracy'). To support the central claim, please provide a direct comparison on a small exact model: for example, compute marginal probabilities from the exact solution (or from SSA samples) and show that the entropy ranking agrees with a distribution-aware importance ranking (e.g., the rank needed for a prescribed accuracy or a KL-divergence measure).
  2. [Sections 5.1.2 and 5.2.2, reference solutions] The reference solutions for the pancreatic cancer and apoptosis models are DLR approximations at rank 50 and 60, not solutions of the full master equation. The reported differences (3.34e-3 and 4.77e-3) between the r=50 and r=60 solutions only establish self-consistency of the DLR solver; a shared bias in the low-rank manifold could still affect the ranking of partitionings. Since the abstract claims superiority to manual and cut-minimal partitionings for these systems, at least one of the larger models should be validated against an independent reference (e.g., SSA estimates of the first moments, or the exact solution of a reduced model with similar topology).
  3. [Section 4.3, paragraph preceding Algorithm 1] The hierarchical entropy computation is underspecified. The sentence 'when a reaction pathway was approximated on the parent node, then it must not be considered for the computation of the entropies in the child nodes' needs a precise definition of how the Boolean rule's dependence is modified when computing Eq. (8) at child nodes (e.g., set to a constant, or excluded from the sum over species). The current Algorithm 1 does not show this step, yet the numerical values in Tables 6 and 7, and therefore the selection of 'best', depend on it.
  4. [Abstract and Section 6] The claim that the resulting accuracy is 'superior to both partitionings chosen by human experts and those found by simply minimizing the number of reaction pathways' is stronger than the evidence presented. The only direct comparison with a human-expert partition is the one-level pancreatic cancer case (Section 5.1.2, where 'best' beats 'literature'); in the mTOR example, manual partitions (BLUE, PURPLE, GREEN) are used to illustrate the entropy correlation, but the algorithm's single selected partition is not explicitly benchmarked against them, and Figure 6 shows cases where it would not be the most accurate. Please qualify the claim to what is demonstrated, or add the missing direct comparisons.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 6] The conclusion reads 'we proposed an heuristic algorithm'; 'an heuristic' should be 'a heuristic'.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eq. (8)] The notation Ω∁_i for the complementary partition is not defined in the text; please introduce it explicitly or use a simpler notation such as Ω_i^c.
  3. [Figure 6] The caption states 'A linear fit is shown for solutions with the same rank', but no fit parameters or R² values are reported; please include them or describe the fit as a qualitative guide only.
  4. [Figure 12 caption] The caption contains a duplicated word: 'for for three hierarchical partitionings' should be 'for three hierarchical partitionings'.
  5. [Section 5.1.1, Figure 5 discussion] The text notes that the best partition depends on the time horizon (around t=150 vs. steady state); please clarify which error measure (maximum over time, value at t=300, or steady state) is used for the entropy correlation in Figure 6, since the ranking is sensitive to this choice.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the entropy heuristic is computed from Boolean rules and partition candidates without fitted parameters, and the superiority claim is tested against exact and converged references.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the entropy H defined in Eqs. (6)-(9) ranks one-level and hierarchical partitions by expected information loss, and that choosing the minimal-H partition from a Kernighan-Lin pool improves DLR accuracy. This is not circular: H is a deterministic function of the Boolean rules and the partition, with no parameters fitted to DLR errors, and the ranking is not defined in terms of the error it predicts. The accuracy claim is validated empirically against independent references: an exact master-equation solution for the mTOR model, and converged rank-60 DLR references for the pancreatic cancer and apoptosis models. Baselines include cut-minimal partitions and hand-chosen partitions from the literature. Self-citations to the authors' earlier DLR integrators and to [54] for hand partitions are used as computational tools and comparison baselines, not as evidence for the entropy ranking; the heuristic itself is tested in this paper. The uniform averaging in Eq. (8) is a stated modeling assumption that could make the heuristic suboptimal if the true distribution is far from uniform, but that is a correctness risk, not a logical equivalence. The paper even reports that the lowest-entropy partition is not the most accurate for every rank (Fig. 6), which confirms the entropy is not tautologically aligned with the error. No equation identifies H with the DLR error, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained and no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the Boolean master equation model, the DLR framework, and the ad hoc entropy heuristic. No numerical parameters are fitted to data: n_KL and the rank r are user-selected experimental settings, not fitted free parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Each species is governed by one Boolean rule and all transitions are equally likely (uniform transition probability A_i = 1 when the rule changes the state).
    Section 2 assumes the asynchronous update scheme with equal rates for all Boolean rules, matching prior literature. The conclusion notes that probabilistic Boolean networks would require weighting the rule-specific entropies, so the current formulation is specific to the uniform-rate model.
  • domain assumption The dynamical low-rank approximation with a fixed tree structure and rank r is meaningful, and its accuracy is strongly controlled by the number and importance of cut reaction pathways.
    Section 3 and [54] establish that partition choice strongly affects DLR accuracy; the paper relies on this to justify minimizing both cuts and information loss.
  • ad hoc to paper The information lost by cutting a pathway is quantified by the Shannon entropy of the Boolean rule output averaged over a uniform distribution of the states in the complementary partition, as in Eqs. (6)-(8).
    This is the central heuristic. It is not derived from the master equation and is not validated against actual state distributions. The paper explicitly calls it a heuristic and tests it empirically.
  • domain assumption The tree structure for hierarchical decompositions is fixed in advance by the user; the algorithm only assigns species to nodes of that tree.
    Section 4.3 states that the tree structure is an input and a balanced binary tree is chosen. This limits the method if a non-balanced or different hierarchy would be preferable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Automatic partitioning for the low-rank integration of stochastic Boolean reaction networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XALDDJ6X

@misc{pith2026250104157,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Automatic partitioning for the low-rank integration of stochastic Boolean reaction networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XALDDJ6X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04157}
}
read the original abstract

Boolean reaction networks are an important tool in biochemistry for studying mechanisms in the biological cell. However, the stochastic formulation of such networks requires the solution of a master equation which inherently suffers from the curse of dimensionality. In the past, the dynamical low-rank (DLR) approximation has been repeatedly used to solve high-dimensional reaction networks by separating the network into smaller partitions. However, the partitioning of these networks was so far only done by hand. In this paper, we present a heuristic, automatic partitioning scheme based on two ingredients: the Kernighan-Lin algorithm and information entropy. Our approach is computationally inexpensive and can be easily incorporated as a preprocessing step into the existing simulation workflow. We test our scheme by partitioning Boolean reaction networks on a single level and also in a hierarchical fashion with tree tensor networks. The resulting accuracy of the scheme is superior to both partitionings chosen by human experts and those found by simply minimizing the number of reaction pathways between partitions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04157 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The graph of the Boolean reaction net￾work with five species and rules specified in Ta￾ble 1. We want to elucidate the concepts of Boolean reaction networks by giving a small example. Let us consider a reaction network with five species Si (i = 0, . . . , 4) and Boolean rules as stated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Graphical representation of Equa￾tion (2) and (b) reaction graph for the five￾dimensional example problem of Section 2 with two partitions. The time dependency of the low￾rank factors and the coefficient matrix has been omitted. Si0i1 Q0 i0i00i01 Q1 i1i10i11 X00 i00 (x0) X01 i01 (x1) X10 i10 (x2, x3) X11 i11 (x4) (a) S0 S1 S4 S2 S3 (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Reaction graph of the mTOR pathway example consisting of 22 species. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Time-dependent error of the DLR approximation ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Entropy-dependent error of the DLR approximation at time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Time-dependent error of the DLR approximation in the infinity norm for four one-level [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Reaction graphs for the pancreatic cancer example (consisting of 34 species) with different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Time-dependent error of the DLR approximation in the infinity norm for three hierarchical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Time-dependent first moments of five biochemically relevant species of the pancreatic cancer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Reaction graphs for the apoptosis example (consisting of 41 species) with different partitionings. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Time-dependent error of the DLR approximation in the infinity norm for for three hierarchical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Time-dependent first moments of six biochemically relevant species of the apoptosis example. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Scale-Free Networks: A Decade and Beyond

    A.-L. Barab´ asi. “Scale-Free Networks: A Decade and Beyond”. In:Science 325.5939 (2009), pp. 412–

    work page 2009

  2. [2]

    A survey of gene regulatory networks modelling methods: from differential equations, to Boolean and qualitative bioinspired models

    R. Barbuti et al. “A survey of gene regulatory networks modelling methods: from differential equations, to Boolean and qualitative bioinspired models”. In: J. Membr. Comput. 2 (2020), pp. 207–

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    An extended gene protein/products boolean network model including post- transcriptional regulation

    A. Benso et al. “An extended gene protein/products boolean network model including post- transcriptional regulation”. In: Theor. Biol. Med. Model. 11.S5 (2014). doi: 10 . 1186 / 1742 - 4682-11-S1-S5

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Mathematical Modelling of Cell-Fate Decision in Response to Death Receptor Engagement

    L. Calzone et al. “Mathematical Modelling of Cell-Fate Decision in Response to Death Receptor Engagement”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 6.3 (2010). doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000702

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000702 2010

  5. [5]

    Efficient 6D Vlasov simulation using the dynamical low-rank framework Ensign

    F. Cassini and L. Einkemmer. “Efficient 6D Vlasov simulation using the dynamical low-rank framework Ensign”. In: Comput. Phys. Commun. 280 (2022). doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108489

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Low-rank Tree Tensor Network Operators for Long-Range Pairwise Interactions

    G. Ceruti, D. Kressner, and D. Sulz. “Low-rank Tree Tensor Network Operators for Long-Range Pairwise Interactions”. In: arXiv (2024). doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2405.09952

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.09952 2024

  7. [7]

    A parallel rank-adaptive integrator for dynamical low-rank approximation

    G. Ceruti, J. Kusch, and C. Lubich. “A parallel rank-adaptive integrator for dynamical low-rank approximation”. In: SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 46.3 (2024), B205–B228. doi: 10.1137/23M1565103

    work page doi:10.1137/23m1565103 2024

  8. [8]

    A rank-adaptive robust integrator for dynamical low-rank approximation

    G. Ceruti, J. Kusch, and C. Lubich. “A rank-adaptive robust integrator for dynamical low-rank approximation”. In: BIT Numer. Math. 62 (2022), pp. 1149–1174. doi: 10.1007/s10543- 021- 00907-7

    doi:10.1007/s10543- 2022

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    An unconventional robust integrator for dynamical low-rank approxima- tion

    G. Ceruti and C. Lubich. “An unconventional robust integrator for dynamical low-rank approxima- tion”. In: BIT Numer. Math. 62.1 (2022), pp. 23–44. doi: 10.1007/s10543-021-00873-0

    2022 doi

  2. [10]

    Rank-adaptive time integration of tree tensor networks

    G. Ceruti, C. Lubich, and D. Sulz. “Rank-adaptive time integration of tree tensor networks”. In: SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 61.1 (2023), pp. 194–222. doi: 10.1137/22M1473790

    2023 doi

  3. [11]

    Time integration of tree tensor networks

    G. Ceruti, C. Lubich, and H. Walach. “Time integration of tree tensor networks”. In: SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 59.1 (2021), pp. 289–313. doi: 10.1137/20M1321838

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    A parallel Basis Update and Galerkin integrator for tree tensor networks

    G. Ceruti et al. “A parallel Basis Update and Galerkin integrator for tree tensor networks”. In: arXiv (2024). doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2412.00858

    2024 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    A robust second-order low-rank BUG integrator based on the midpoint rule

    G. Ceruti et al. “A robust second-order low-rank BUG integrator based on the midpoint rule”. In: BIT Numer. Math. 64.30 (2024). doi: 10.1007/s10543-024-01032-x

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    Efficient dynamical low-rank approximation for the Vlasov-Amp` ere-Fokker- Planck system

    J. Coughlin and J. Hu. “Efficient dynamical low-rank approximation for the Vlasov-Amp` ere-Fokker- Planck system”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 470 (2022), p. 111590. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111590

    2022

  7. [15]

    Robust and conservative dynamical low-rank methods for the Vlasov equation via a novel macro-micro decomposition

    J. Coughlin, J. Hu, and U. Shumlak. “Robust and conservative dynamical low-rank methods for the Vlasov equation via a novel macro-micro decomposition”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 509 (2024), p. 113055. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2024.113055. 21

    2024

  8. [16]

    An adaptive solution to the chemical master equation using quantized tensor trains with sliding windows

    T. Dinh and R. B. Sidje. “An adaptive solution to the chemical master equation using quantized tensor trains with sliding windows”. In: Phys. Biol. 17.065014 (2020). doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/aba1d2

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    Simultaneous state-time approximation of the chemical master equation using tensor product formats

    S. Dolgov and B. Khoromskij. “Simultaneous state-time approximation of the chemical master equation using tensor product formats”. In: Numer. Linear Algebra Appl. 22 (2015), pp. 197–219. doi: 10.1002/nla.1942

    2015 doi

  10. [18]

    Accelerating the simulation of kinetic shear Alfv´ en waves with a dynamical low-rank approximation

    L. Einkemmer. “Accelerating the simulation of kinetic shear Alfv´ en waves with a dynamical low-rank approximation”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 501.112757 (2024). doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2024.112757

    2024

  11. [19]

    Asymptotic–preserving and energy stable dynamical low-rank approximation

    L. Einkemmer, J. Hu, and J. Kusch. “Asymptotic–preserving and energy stable dynamical low-rank approximation”. In: SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 62.1 (2024), pp. 73–92. doi: 10.1137/23M1547603

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    An asymptotic-preserving dynamical low-rank method for the multi-scale multi-dimensional linear transport equation

    L. Einkemmer, J. Hu, and Y. Wang. “An asymptotic-preserving dynamical low-rank method for the multi-scale multi-dimensional linear transport equation”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 439.110353 (2021), p. 110353. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110353

    2021

  13. [21]

    An Efficient Dynamical Low-Rank Algorithm for the Boltzmann- BGK Equation Close to the Compressible Viscous Flow Regime

    L. Einkemmer, J. Hu, and L. Ying. “An Efficient Dynamical Low-Rank Algorithm for the Boltzmann- BGK Equation Close to the Compressible Viscous Flow Regime”. In: SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 43.5 (2021), B1057–B1080. doi: 10.1137/21m1392772

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    A mass, momentum, and energy conservative dynamical low-rank scheme for the Vlasov equation

    L. Einkemmer and I. Joseph. “A mass, momentum, and energy conservative dynamical low-rank scheme for the Vlasov equation”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 443 (2021), p. 110495. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp. 2021.110495

    2021

  15. [23]

    A Low-Rank Projector-Splitting Integrator for the Vlasov-Poisson Equation

    L. Einkemmer and C. Lubich. “A Low-Rank Projector-Splitting Integrator for the Vlasov-Poisson Equation”. In: SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 40.5 (2018), B1330–B1360. doi: 10.1137/18M116383X

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    A hierarchical dynamical low-rank algorithm for the stochastic description of large reaction networks

    L. Einkemmer, J. Mangott, and M. Prugger. “A hierarchical dynamical low-rank algorithm for the stochastic description of large reaction networks”. In: arXiv (2024). doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2407. 11792

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    A low-rank complexity reduction algorithm for the high-dimensional kinetic chemical master equation

    L. Einkemmer, J. Mangott, and M. Prugger. “A low-rank complexity reduction algorithm for the high-dimensional kinetic chemical master equation”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 503.112827 (2024). doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2024.112827

    2024

  18. [26]

    A low-rank projector-splitting integrator for the Vlasov–Maxwell equations with divergence correction

    L. Einkemmer, A. Ostermann, and C. Piazzola. “A low-rank projector-splitting integrator for the Vlasov–Maxwell equations with divergence correction”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 403 (2020), p. 109063

    2020

  19. [27]

    A robust and conservative dynamical low-rank algorithm

    L. Einkemmer, A. Ostermann, and C. Scalone. “A robust and conservative dynamical low-rank algorithm”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 484 (2023), p. 112060. doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112060

    2023

  20. [28]

    Graphviz – Open Source Graph Drawing Tools

    J. Ellson et al. “ Graphviz – Open Source Graph Drawing Tools”. In: Graph Drawing (GD 2001) . Ed. by P. Mutzel, M. J¨ unger, and S. Leipert. LNCS 2265. Springer, 2001, pp. 483–484

    2001

  21. [29]

    Erban and S

    R. Erban and S. J. Chapman. Stochastic Modelling of Reaction–Diffusion Processes . Cambridge University Press, 2020. doi: 10.1017/9781108628389

    2020 doi

  22. [30]

    Gardiner

    C. Gardiner. Handbook of Stochastic Methods . Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004

    2004

  23. [31]

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

    D. T. Gillespie. “A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evolution of coupled chemical reactions”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 22.4 (1976), pp. 403–434. doi: 10.1016/0021- 9991(76)90041-3

    1976 doi

  24. [32]

    Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions

    D. T. Gillespie. “Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 81.25 (1977), pp. 2340–2361. doi: 10.1021/j100540a008

    1977 doi

  25. [33]

    Symbolic Model Checking of Signaling Pathways in Pancreatic Cancer

    H. Gong et al. “Symbolic Model Checking of Signaling Pathways in Pancreatic Cancer”. In: Pro- ceedings of the ISCA 3rd International Conference on Bioinformatics and Computational Biology 2011 (BICoB-2011) . Ed. by H. Al-Mubaid. ISCA, 2011, pp. 245–250

    2011

  26. [34]

    Integrative Modelling of the Influence of MAPK Network on Cancer Cell Fate Decision

    L. Grieco et al. “Integrative Modelling of the Influence of MAPK Network on Cancer Cell Fate Decision”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 9.10 (2013). doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003286

    2013 doi

  27. [35]

    Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX

    A. A. Hagberg, D. A. Schult, and P. J. Swart. “Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX”. In: Proceedings of the 7th Python in Science Conference (SciPy2008) . Ed. by G. Varoquaux, T. Vaught, and J. Millman. 2008, pp. 11–15. doi: 10.25080/TCWV9851

    2008 doi

  28. [36]

    On the numerical solution of the chemical master equation with sums of rank one tensors

    M. Hegland and J. Garcke. “On the numerical solution of the chemical master equation with sums of rank one tensors”. In: ANZIAM J. 52 (2011), pp. C628–C643. doi: 10.21914/anziamj.v52i0.3895

    2011 doi

  29. [37]

    Tensor-train approximation of the chemical master equation and its application for parameter inference

    I. G. Ion et al. “Tensor-train approximation of the chemical master equation and its application for parameter inference”. In: J. Chem. Phys. 155.034102 (2021). doi: 10.1063/5.0045521

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    A Dynamical Low-Rank Approach to the Chemical Master Equation

    T. Jahnke and W. Huisinga. “A Dynamical Low-Rank Approach to the Chemical Master Equation”. In: Bull. Math. Biol. 70 (2008), pp. 2283–2302. doi: 10.1007/s11538-008-9346-x . 22

    2008 doi

  31. [39]

    Metabolic Stability and Epigenesis in Randomly Constructed Genetic Nets

    S. A. Kauffman. “Metabolic Stability and Epigenesis in Randomly Constructed Genetic Nets”. In: J. Theoret. Biol. 22 (1969), pp. 437–467. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(69)90015-0

    1969 doi

  32. [40]

    Tensor approximation of stationary distributions of chemical reaction networks

    V. Kazeev and C. Schwab. “Tensor approximation of stationary distributions of chemical reaction networks”. In: SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 36.3 (2015), pp. 1221–1247. doi: 10.1137/130927218

    2015 doi

  33. [41]

    Direct Solution of the Chemical Master Equation Using Quantized Tensor Trains

    V. Kazeev et al. “Direct Solution of the Chemical Master Equation Using Quantized Tensor Trains”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 10.3 (2014). doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003359

    2014 doi

  34. [42]

    An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs

    B. W. Kernighan and S. Lin. “An efficient heuristic procedure for partitioning graphs”. In: Bell Labs Tech. J. 49.2 (1970), pp. 291–307. doi: 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1970.tb01770.x

    1970

  35. [43]

    Dynamical Low-Rank Approximation

    O. Koch and C. Lubich. “Dynamical Low-Rank Approximation”. In: SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 29.2 (2007), pp. 434–454. doi: 10.1137/050639703

    2007 doi

  36. [44]

    Second-order robust parallel integrators for dynamical low-rank approximation

    J. Kusch. “Second-order robust parallel integrators for dynamical low-rank approximation”. In: arXiv (2024). doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.02834

    2024 doi arXiv

  37. [45]

    A robust collision source method for rank adaptive dynamical low-rank approximation in radiation therapy

    J. Kusch and P. Stammer. “A robust collision source method for rank adaptive dynamical low-rank approximation in radiation therapy”. In: ESAIM: Math. Model. Numer. Anal. 57.2 (2023), pp. 865–

    2023

  38. [46]

    A low-rank power iteration scheme for neutron transport critically problems

    J. Kusch et al. “A low-rank power iteration scheme for neutron transport critically problems”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 470.111587 (2022). doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111587

    2022

  39. [47]

    Quantitative and logic modelling of molecular and gene networks

    N. Le Nov` ere. “Quantitative and logic modelling of molecular and gene networks”. In: Nat. Rev. Genet. 16 (2015), pp. 146–158. doi: 10.1038/nrg3885

    2015 doi

  40. [48]

    A projector-splitting integrator for dynamical low-rank approxima- tion

    C. Lubich and I. V. Oseledets. “A projector-splitting integrator for dynamical low-rank approxima- tion”. In: BIT Numer. Math. 54.1 (2014), pp. 171–188. doi: 10.1007/s10543-013-0454-0

    2014 doi

  41. [49]

    Time Integration of Rank-Constrained Tucker Tensors

    C. Lubich, B. Vandereycken, and H. Walach. “Time Integration of Rank-Constrained Tucker Tensors”. In: SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 56.3 (2018), pp. 1273–1290. doi: 10.1137/17M1146889

    2018 doi

  42. [50]

    Boolean network-based analysis of the apoptosis network: Irreversible apoptosis and stable surviving

    Z. Mai and H. Liu. “Boolean network-based analysis of the apoptosis network: Irreversible apoptosis and stable surviving”. In: J. Theor. Biol. 259 (2009), pp. 760–769. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.04. 024

    2009 doi

  43. [51]

    Quantifying Rare Events in Stochastic Reaction-Diffusion Dynamics Using Tensor Networks

    S. B. Nicholson and T. R. Gingrich. “Quantifying Rare Events in Stochastic Reaction-Diffusion Dynamics Using Tensor Networks”. In: Phys. Rev. X 13.041006 (2023). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX. 13.041006

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    A high-order/low-order (HOLO) algorithm for preserving conservation in time-dependent low-rank transport calculations

    Z. Peng and R. McClarren. “A high-order/low-order (HOLO) algorithm for preserving conservation in time-dependent low-rank transport calculations”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 447.110672 (2021). doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2021.110672

    2021

  45. [53]

    A low-rank method for two-dimensional time-dependent radiation transport calculations

    Z. Peng, R. McClarren, and M. Frank. “A low-rank method for two-dimensional time-dependent radiation transport calculations”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 421.109735 (2020). doi: 10.1016/j.jcp. 2020.109735

    2020

  46. [54]

    A dynamical low-rank approach to solve the chemical master equation for biological reaction networks

    M. Prugger, L. Einkemmer, and C. F. Lopez. “A dynamical low-rank approach to solve the chemical master equation for biological reaction networks”. In: J. Comput. Phys. 489 (2023). doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2023.112250

    2023

  47. [55]

    Unsupervised logic-based mechanism inference for network-driven biological processes

    M. Prugger et al. “Unsupervised logic-based mechanism inference for network-driven biological processes”. In: PLOS Comput. Biol. 17.6 (2021). doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009035

    2021 doi

  48. [56]

    A Mathematical Theory of Communication

    C. E. Shannon. “A Mathematical Theory of Communication”. In: Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27.3 (1948), pp. 379–423. doi: 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

    1948

  49. [57]

    Probabilistic Boolean networks: a rule-based uncertainty model for gene regulatory networks

    I. Shmulevich et al. “Probabilistic Boolean networks: a rule-based uncertainty model for gene regulatory networks”. In: Bioinformatics 18.2 (2002), pp. 261–274. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/ 18.2.261

    2002 doi

  50. [58]

    Numerical simulation of long-range open quantum many-body dynamics with tree tensor networks

    D. Sulz et al. “Numerical simulation of long-range open quantum many-body dynamics with tree tensor networks”. In: Phys. Rev. A 109.022420 (2024). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.109.022420

    2024 doi

  51. [59]

    Boolean formalization of genetic control circuits

    R. Thomas. “Boolean formalization of genetic control circuits”. In: J. Theor. Biol. 42.3 (1973), pp. 563–585. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(73)90247-6

    1973 doi

  52. [60]

    Regulatory Networks Seen as Asynchronous Automata: A Logical Description

    R. Thomas. “Regulatory Networks Seen as Asynchronous Automata: A Logical Description”. In: J. Theor. Biol. 153.1 (1991), pp. 1–23. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80350-9

    1991 doi

  53. [61]

    N. G. Van Kampen. Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry . North Holland, 2007. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-52965-7.X5000-4 . 23

    2007 doi

  54. [62]

    Boolean modeling in systems biology: an overview of methodology and applications

    R.-S. Wang, A. Saadatpour, and R. Albert. “Boolean modeling in systems biology: an overview of methodology and applications”. In: Phys. Biol. 9.055001 (2012). doi: 10.1088/1478-3975/9/5/ 055001. 24

    2012 doi

  55. [226]

    doi: 10.1007/s41965-020-00046-y

    doi

  56. [413]

    doi: 10.1126/science.1173299

    doi

  57. [891]

    doi: 10.1051/m2an/2022090

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.