↓ Skip to main content

Comprehensive benchmarking of Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for dynamical systems

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comprehensive benchmarking of Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for dynamical systems
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12918-017-0433-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin Ballnus, Sabine Hug, Kathrin Hatz, Linus Görlitz, Jan Hasenauer, Fabian J. Theis

Abstract

In quantitative biology, mathematical models are used to describe and analyze biological processes. The parameters of these models are usually unknown and need to be estimated from experimental data using statistical methods. In particular, Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods have become increasingly popular as they allow for a rigorous analysis of parameter and prediction uncertainties without the need for assuming parameter identifiability or removing non-identifiable parameters. A broad spectrum of MCMC algorithms have been proposed, including single- and multi-chain approaches. However, selecting and tuning sampling algorithms suited for a given problem remains challenging and a comprehensive comparison of different methods is so far not available. We present the results of a thorough benchmarking of state-of-the-art single- and multi-chain sampling methods, including Adaptive Metropolis, Delayed Rejection Adaptive Metropolis, Metropolis adjusted Langevin algorithm, Parallel Tempering and Parallel Hierarchical Sampling. Different initialization and adaptation schemes are considered. To ensure a comprehensive and fair comparison, we consider problems with a range of features such as bifurcations, periodical orbits, multistability of steady-state solutions and chaotic regimes. These problem properties give rise to various posterior distributions including uni- and multi-modal distributions and non-normally distributed mode tails. For an objective comparison, we developed a pipeline for the semi-automatic comparison of sampling results. The comparison of MCMC algorithms, initialization and adaptation schemes revealed that overall multi-chain algorithms perform better than single-chain algorithms. In some cases this performance can be further increased by using a preceding multi-start local optimization scheme. These results can inform the selection of sampling methods and the benchmark collection can serve for the evaluation of new algorithms. Furthermore, our results confirm the need to address exploration quality of MCMC chains before applying the commonly used quality measure of effective sample size to prevent false analysis conclusions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 121 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 19%
Student > Master 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 7 6%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 24 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 17 14%
Mathematics 14 11%
Computer Science 13 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 7%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 34 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2021.
All research outputs
#4,212,559
of 24,046,191 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#117
of 1,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,978
of 319,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,046,191 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,133 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.