↓ Skip to main content

CANA: A Python Package for Quantifying Control and Canalization in Boolean Networks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
CANA: A Python Package for Quantifying Control and Canalization in Boolean Networks
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.01046
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rion B. Correia, Alexander J. Gates, Xuan Wang, Luis M. Rocha

Abstract

Logical models offer a simple but powerful means to understand the complex dynamics of biochemical regulation, without the need to estimate kinetic parameters. However, even simple automata components can lead to collective dynamics that are computationally intractable when aggregated into networks. In previous work we demonstrated that automata network models of biochemical regulation are highly canalizing, whereby many variable states and their groupings are redundant (Marques-Pita and Rocha, 2013). The precise charting and measurement of such canalization simplifies these models, making even very large networks amenable to analysis. Moreover, canalization plays an important role in the control, robustness, modularity and criticality of Boolean network dynamics, especially those used to model biochemical regulation (Gates and Rocha, 2016; Gates et al., 2016; Manicka, 2017). Here we describe a new publicly-available Python package that provides the necessary tools to extract, measure, and visualize canalizing redundancy present in Boolean network models. It extracts the pathways most effective in controlling dynamics in these models, including their effective graph and dynamics canalizing map, as well as other tools to uncover minimum sets of control variables.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 7 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 15%
Computer Science 3 12%
Engineering 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 23 March 2021.
All research outputs
#7,267,147
of 24,002,307 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,442
of 14,664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,513
of 334,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#173
of 488 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,002,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 334,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 488 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.