Advertisement

Symbolic Model Checking of Biochemical Networks

  • Nathalie Chabrier
  • François Fages
Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2602)

Abstract

Model checking is an automatic method for deciding if a circuit or a program, expressed as a concurrent transition system, satisfies a set of properties expressed in a temporal logic such as CTL. In this paper we argue that symbolic model checking is feasible in systems biology and that it shows some advantages over simulation for querying and validating formal models of biological processes. We report our experiments on using the symbolic model checker NuSMV and the constraint-based model checker DMC, for the modeling and querying of two biological processes: a qualitative model of the mammalian cell cycle control after Kohn's diagrams, and a quantitative model of gene expression regulation.

Keywords

Model Check Atomic Proposition Biochemical Network Kripke Structure Hybrid Automaton 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    R. Alur, C. Belta, F. Ivancic, V. Kumar, M. Mintz, G. J. Pappas, H. Rubin, and J. Schug. Hybrid modeling and simulation of biomolecular networks. In Springer, editor, Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control, LNCS 2034, pages 19–32, Rome, Italy, 2001. 150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    E. Asarin, T. Dang, and O. Maler. d/dt: A verification tool for hybrid systems. In Invited session “New Developments inVerification Tools for Hybrid Systems”, in Proceedings of the Conference on Decision and Control, Florida, USA, July 2001. 160Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. Backofen, S. Will, and E. Bornberg-Bauer. Application of constraint programming techniques for structure prediction of lattice proteins with extended alphabets. Bioinformatics, 3(15):234–242, 1999. 160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Bockmayr and A. Courtois. Using hybrid concurrent constraint programming to model dynamic biological systems. In Springer, editor, 18th International Conference on Logic Programming, pages 85–99, Copenhagen, 2002. 150, 157Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Bozzano, G. Delzanno, and M. Martelli. Model checking linear logic specifications. Technical report, Technical report,University di Genova, March 2002. 160Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    M. Chiaverini and V. Danos. A core modeling language for the working molecular biologist. Technical report, CNRS, PPS, Paris 7, November 2002. 150, 155Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    A. Cimatti, E. M. Clarke, E. Giunchiglia, F. Giunchiglia, M. Pistore, M. Roveri, R. Sebastiani, and A. Tacchella. Nusmv 2: An opensource tool for symbolic model checking. In In Proceeding of International Conference on Computer-Aided Veri-fication, CAV’2002, Copenhagen, Danmark, July 2002. 158Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    E. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D. Peled. Model Checking. MIT Press, 1999. 152, 158Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    H. de Jong. Modeling and simulation of genetic regulatory systems: A literature review. Journal of Computational Biology, 9(1):69–105, 2001. 151Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    G. Delzanno and A. Podelski. Model checking in clp. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems TACAS’99, volume 1579 of LNCS, pages 223–239. Springer-Verlag, January 1999. 154, 158Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. Delzanno and A. Podelski. DMC user guide, 2000. 158, 159Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Eker, M. Knapp, K. Laderoute, P. Lincoln, J. Meseguer, and K. Sonmez. Pathway logic: Symbolic analysis of biological signaling. In the Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing, pages 400–412, January 2002. 160Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    E.A. Emerson. Temporal and Modal Logic, pages 995–1072. J. van Leeuwen Ed., North-Holland Pub. Co./MIT Press, 1990. 152, 153, 154Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    R. Ghosh and C. Tomlin. Lateral inhibition through delta-notch signaling: A piecewise affine hybrid model. In Springer, editor, Hybrid Systems: Computation and Control, LNCS 2034, pages 232–246, Rome, Italy, 2001. 150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    T. Henzinger, J. Preusig, and H. Wong-Toi. Some lessons from the hytech experience. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, CDC’2001, 2001. 160Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    R. Hofestädt and S. Thelen. Quantitative modeling of biochemical networks. In In Silico Biology, volume 1, pages 39–53. 1998. 150Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    K.W. Kohn. Molecular interaction map of the mammalian cell cycle control and dna repair systems. Molecular Biology of Cell, 10(8):703–2734, August 1999. 150, 155Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    S. Laplante, R. Lassaigne, and F. Magniez. Probabilistic model checking: an approach based on property testing. In Proc. of the 7th annual IEEE symposium on Logic in Computer Science LICS’02, Copenhagen, 2002. 160Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    H. Matsuno, A. Doi, M. Nagasaki, and S. Miyano. Hybrid petri net representation of gene regulatory network. In Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing (5), pages 338–349, 2000. 150Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    D. Monniaux. The analysis of probabilistic programs by abstract interpretation. PhD thesis, Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France, 2001. 160Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    M. Nagasaki, S. Onami, S. Miyano, and H. Kitano. Bio-calculus: Its concept, and an application for molecular interaction. In Currents in Computational Molecular Biology., volume 30 of Frontiers Science Series. 2000. 149Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    A. Regev, W. Silverman, and E. Shapiro. Representation and simulation of biochemical processes using the pi-calculus process algebra. In Proceedings of the Pacific Symposium of Biocomputing, pages 6:459–470, 2001. 149Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    U. A. Shankar. An introduction to assertionnal reasoning for concurrent systems. ACM Computing Surveys, 3(25):225–262, 1993. 155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    R. Thomas and d’Ari. Biological feedback. CRC press, 1990. 151Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    A. Tiwari and P. Lincoln. Automated technique for stability analysis of deltanotch lateral inhibition mechanism. Technical report, SRI, Stanford USA, 2002. 159Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathalie Chabrier
    • 1
  • François Fages
    • 1
  1. 1.Projet ContraintesINRIA-RocquencourtFrance

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options