# Forums

 SBML Discussions » sbml-discuss » Stochastic simulation in SBMLShow: Today's Posts  :: Message Navigator| Subscribe to topic
AuthorTopic

Posts: 123
Registered:
September 2003
 Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML 29 Nov '11 12:40 Dear Chris, I would interpret such a reaction in the stochastic sense as your option 2. This is indeed how COPASI does it. One particular issue is the Avogadro's number, which is not 6.02e23 as you indicate, but a much more precise number. Actually this number is improved from time to time (it is a fundamental physical constant which people keep estimating better and better). The precision of this number makes a big difference in models with small volumes and small concentratoins (when converting from molar to number of molecules). I think SBML should at least recommend the number of significant digits of this number to use, and a good source for the best estimate of this number. best wishes Pedro On 11/29/2011 07:50 PM, Chris J. Myers wrote: > Hi All, > > Currently, the SBML specification does not describe how to perform stochastic simulation on an SBML model. This has led to different tools implementing it differently making stochastic models not portable from one tool to another. Therefore, we would like to come up with a precise semantics for stochastic simulation to solve this problem. There is a subtlety though that complicates things. Consider the following model: > > Species A has an initial amount of 1 mole while species B has an initial amount of 0 moles. There is one reaction with A as a reactant and B as a product. The question is what happens to the state when this reaction occurs. > > 1) 1 mole of A is converted into 1 mole of B > > Pro: simple interpretation that is independent of units (namely, units can be dropped without any change in behavior). > > Con: typical interpretation of stochastic formulations is that reactions update molecule counts. > > 2) 1 molecule of A is converted into 1 molecule of B > > Pro: matches the typical interpretation. > > Con: the behavior is no longer independent of units (namely, a unit conversion must be performed implicitly). > > In an implementation of (2), one would need to convert the species initial amounts into units of individual molecule counts. In the case of moles, this would mean multiplying each species by Avogadro's number (6.02e23). If the units are changed to nanoMoles, then a different conversion is necessary. > > So, the question is which is more important: > > 1) Avoiding having implicit unit conversions and having units affect simulation behavior. > > OR > > 2) Keeping an individual molecule interpretation of stochastic reactions. > > Thoughts? > > Chris > > ____________________________________________________________ > To manage your sbml-discuss list subscription, visit > https://utils.its.caltech.edu/mailman/listinfo/sbml-discuss > > For a web interface to the sbml-discuss mailing list, visit > http://sbml.org/Forums/ > > For questions or feedback about the sbml-discuss list, > contact sbml-team@caltech.edu > -- Pedro Mendes Chair in Computational Systems Biology School of Computer Science Manchester Centre for Integrative Systems Biology University of Manchester Manchester Interdisciplinary Biocentre 131 Princess Street Manchester, M1 7DN, U.K. ____________________________________________________________ To manage your sbml-discuss list subscription, visit https://utils.its.caltech.edu/mailman/listinfo/sbml-discuss For a web interface to the sbml-discuss mailing list, visit http://sbml.org/Forums/ For questions or feedback about the sbml-discuss list, contact sbml-team@caltech.edu

SubjectPosterDate
Stochastic simulation in SBML myers29 Nov '11 11:50
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Andrew Miller29 Nov '11 12:19
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Frederic.BOIS29 Nov '11 12:31
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML  Pedro Mendes29 Nov '11 12:40
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Mike Hucka29 Nov '11 13:39
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Pedro Mendes29 Nov '11 13:46
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Lucian Smith29 Nov '11 12:42
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Darren J Wilkinson29 Nov '11 12:45
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML myers29 Nov '11 13:38
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Mike Hucka29 Nov '11 13:44
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML myers29 Nov '11 13:57
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Darren J Wilkinson29 Nov '11 14:07
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Mike Hucka29 Nov '11 14:09
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Darren J Wilkinson29 Nov '11 14:18
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Nicolas Le Novere29 Nov '11 14:24
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Stefan.Hoops29 Nov '11 16:47
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML curoli30 Nov '11 03:32
Re: Stochastic simulation in SBML Stefan.Hoops29 Nov '11 16:30
 Previous Topic: Call for votes on Level 3 proposals: 'spatial' Next Topic: Comparison Table for SBML Levels and Versions
 Go to forum: SBML Discussions    sbml-discuss    sbml-interoperability    sbml-announce    libsbml-development    jsbml-development