Back

Modelling benefits and costs of decision making and feedback control for organisms in changing environments

Kumar, R.; Johnston, I.

2024-12-05 systems biology
10.1101/2024.11.30.626137 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Cells (and organisms) make decisions in response to their environments. These decisions may help organism survival in environments with limited resource, but also constitute a cost to the organism in terms of the energy involved in sensing, processing, and responding to environmental change. Here, we explore the tradeoffs involved in a cost-benefit analysis of model organisms facing challenging deterministic or stochastic environments. The benefits of tunable versions of proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control are computed under different environmental behaviours; the model reflects both the ability to use this control to decide on cellular strategy and the potential cost associated with this feedback control. We quantify the circumstances under which control is most and least beneficial and the different weightings of the PID terms that perform best in specific and general situations. While our model is very simple, these results provide potential insight into the benefits of different control mechanisms, particularly at the single-cell level.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.2%
Similar papers in this journal
2
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 3%
11.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Journal of Theoretical Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
9.5%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.7%
Similar papers in this journal
5
npj Systems Biology and Applications
○ 125 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
Mathematical Biosciences
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
7
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.0%
8
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.0%
9
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 34%
3.2%
10
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
○ 92 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.3%
11
Physical Biology
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.3%
12
ACS Synthetic Biology
● 287 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.3%
13
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 43%
1.9%
14
Cell Systems
○ 201 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Biosystems
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
16
Ecological Modelling
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
17
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 57%
0.9%
18
Theoretical Ecology
○ 24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
19
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 42%
0.8%
20
Biological Cybernetics
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
21
Ecology and Evolution
○ 267 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
22
Evolutionary Applications
○ 108 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
23
Frontiers in Physiology
○ 106 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
24
The American Naturalist
● 125 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
25
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
◐ 110 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
26
Journal of Neurophysiology
● 302 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.