Advertisement

Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification for Particle-Based Simulation of Lipid Bilayer Membranes

  • Clark BowmanEmail author
  • Karen Larson
  • Alexander Roitershtein
  • Derek Stein
  • Anastasios Matzavinos
Chapter
Part of the Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology book series (MSSET)

Abstract

A number of problems of interest in applied mathematics and biology involve the quantification of uncertainty in computational and real-world models. A recent approach to Bayesian uncertainty quantification using transitional Markov chain Monte Carlo (TMCMC) is extremely parallelizable and has opened the door to a variety of applications which were previously too computationally intensive to be practical. In this chapter, we first explore the machinery required to understand and implement Bayesian uncertainty quantification using TMCMC. We then describe dissipative particle dynamics, a computational particle simulation method which is suitable for modeling biological structures on the subcellular level, and develop an example simulation of a lipid membrane in fluid. Finally, we apply the algorithm to a basic model of uncertainty in our lipid simulation, effectively recovering a target set of parameters (along with distributions corresponding to the uncertainty) and demonstrating the practicality of Bayesian uncertainty quantification for complex particle simulations.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Part of this research was conducted using computational resources and services at the Center for Computation and Visualization, Brown University. CB was partially supported by the NSF through grant DMS-1148284. AR was supported in part by the Simons Foundation under Collaboration Grant 359575. DS acknowledges support from NSF under awards 1409577 and 1505878. KL and AM were partially supported by the NSF through grants DMS-1521266 and DMS-1552903. The authors gratefully acknowledge discussions with Petros Koumoutsakos and his group during the preparation of this chapter. AM thanks the Computational Science and Engineering Laboratory at ETH Zürich for their warm hospitality during a sabbatical semester.

References

  1. 1.
    D.F. Anderson and T.G. Kurtz, Stochastic Analysis of Biochemical Systems. (Springer, New York, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Angelikopoulos, C. Papadimitriou, and P. Koumoutsakos: Bayesian uncertainty quantification and propagation in molecular dynamics simulations: A high performance computing framework. J. Chem. Phys. 137, 144103 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Angelikopoulos, C. Papadimitriou, and P. Koumoutsakos: X-TMCMC: Adaptive Kriging for Bayesian inverse modeling. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 289, 409–428 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Barber, Bayesian Reasoning and Machine Learning. (Cambridge University Press, 2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.L. Beck, K.V. Yuen: Model selection using response measurements: Bayesian probabilistic approach. J. Eng. Mech. 130 (2) 192–203 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Z. Chen, K. Larson, C. Bowman, P. Hadjidoukas, C. Papadimitriou, P. Koumoutsakos, and A. Matzavinos: Data-driven prediction and origin identification of epidemics in population networks. Submitted. (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    B. Efron and T. Hastie, Computer Age Statistical Inference: Algorithms, Evidence, and Data Science. (Cambridge University Press, 2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.Y. Ching, Y.C. Chen: Transitional Markov chain Monte Carlo method for Bayesian model updating, model class selection, and model averaging. J. Eng. Mech. 133 816–832 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Español and P. Warren: Statistical mechanics of dissipative particle dynamics. Europhys. Lett. 30, 191–196 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    V.A. Frolov. A.V. Shnyrova, and J. Zimmerberg. Lipid polymorphisms and membrane shape. CSH Perspect. Biol. 3 (11): a004747 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. Gao, J. Shillcock, and R. Lipowsky: Improved dissipative particle dynamics simulations of lipid bilayers. J. Chem. Phys. 126, 015101 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.D. Groot and P.B. Warren: Dissipative particle dynamics – bridging the gap between atomistic and mesoscopic simulations. J. Chem. Phys. 107, 4423–4435 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Haario, M. Laine, A. Mira and E. Saksman: DRAM: Efficient adaptive MCMC. Stat. Comput. 16, 339–354 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    P.E. Hadjidoukas, P. Angelikopoulos, C. Papadimitriou, P. Koumoutsakos: Π4U: A high performance computing framework for Bayesian uncertainty quantification of complex models. J. Comput. Phys. 284 1–21 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Hajek: Cooling schedules for optimal annealing. Math. Oper. Res. 13 (2), 311–329 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Holley and D. Stroock: Simulated annealing via Sobolev inequalities. Comm. Math. Phys. 115 (4), 553–569 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    I.K. Jarsch, F. Daste, and J.L. Gallop. Membrane curvature in cell biology: an integration of molecular mechanisms. J. Cell. Biol. 214 (4) 375–387 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. Karniadakis, A. Beskok, and N. Aluru, Microflows and Nanoflows: Fundamentals and Simulation. (Springer, New York, 2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. Keaveny, I. Pivkin, M. Maxey, and G. Karniadakis: A comparative study between dissipative particle dynamics and molecular dynamics for simple- and complex-geometry flows. J. Chem. Phys. 123, 104107 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Kim, C. Bowman, J.T. Del Bonis-O’Donnell, A. Matzavinos, and D. Stein: Giant acceleration of DNA diffusion in an array of entropic barriers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 048002 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    O.P. Le Maître and O.M. Knio, Spectral Methods for Uncertainty Quantification. (Springer, New York, 2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    H. Lei and G.E. Karniadakis: Probing vasoocclusion phenomena in sickle cell anemia via mesoscopic simulations. PNAS 110 (28), 211–227 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    B. Leimkuhler and C. Matthews, Molecular Dynamics: With Deterministic and Stochastic Numerical Methods. (Springer, New York, 2015)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    B. Leimkuhler and X. Shang: On the numerical treatment of dissipative particle dynamics and related systems. Journal of Computational Physics 280, 72–95 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    H. Matsuo et al. Role of LBPA and Alix in multivesicular liposome formation and endosome organization. Science 303 531534 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    F. Milde, G. Tauriello, H. Haberkern, and P. Koumoutsakos: SEM++: A particle model of cellular growth, signaling and migration. Comp. Part. Mech. 1 (2), 211–227 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    N. Phan-Thien, Understanding Viscoelasticity: An Introduction to Rheology, 2nd edn. (Springer, Berlin, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    S. Plimpton, Fast parallel algorithms for short-range molecular dynamics. J. Comp. Phys. 117, 1–19 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    D. C. Rapaport, The Art of Molecular Dynamics Simulation, 2nd edn. (Cambridge, UK, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. Salamon, P. Sibani, and R. Frost, Facts, Conjectures, and Improvements for Simulated Annealing. (SIAM, 2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    T. Shardlow and Y. Yan: Geometric ergodicity for dissipative particle dynamics. Stoch. Dyn. 6, 123–154 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    R. Smith, Uncertainty Quantification: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 2014)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    M.A. Stolarska, Y. Kim, H.G. Othmer: Multi-scale models of cell and tissue dynamics. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 367, 3525–3553 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    D. Stroock, An Introduction to Markov Processes, 2nd edn. (Springer, 2014)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Y.-H. Tang, L. Lu, H. Li, C. Evangelinos, L. Grinberg, V. Sachdeva, and G.E. Karniadakis: OpenRBC: A fast simulator of red blood cells at protein resolution. Biophysical Journal 112 (10), 2030–2037 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    A. Tarantola, Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation. (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, 2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    K.-V. Yuen,Bayesian Methods for Structural Dynamics and Civil Engineering. (Wiley Verlag, 2010)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    M.W. Vanik, J.L. Beck, S.K. Au: Bayesian probabilistic approach to structural health monitoring. J. Eng. Mech. 126, 738–745 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    A. Vrugt, C. J. F. ter Braak, C. G. H. Diks, B. A. Robinson, J. M. Hyman, and D. Higdon: Accelerating Markov Chain Monte Carlo Simulation by Differential Evolution with Self-Adaptive Randomized Subspace Sampling, Int. J. Non. Sci. Num. Sim. 10, 273 (2011).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    S. Wu, P. Angelikopoulos, C. Papadimitriou, R. Moser, and P. Koumoutsakos: A hierarchical Bayesian framework for force field selection in molecular dynamics simulations. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 374, 20150032 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    D. Xiu, Numerical Methods for Stochastic Computations: A Spectral Method Approach. (Princeton University Press, 2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clark Bowman
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Karen Larson
    • 2
  • Alexander Roitershtein
    • 3
  • Derek Stein
    • 4
  • Anastasios Matzavinos
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Division of Applied MathematicsBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsIowa State UniversityAmesUSA
  4. 4.Department of PhysicsBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations