Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix broken tests #1070

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion HISTORY.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
# Breaking updates and feature summaries across releases

## Catalyst unreleased (master branch)

- Due to changes in upstream packages, the structural identifiability extension is currently broken.

## Catalyst 14.4.1
- Support for user-defined functions on the RHS when providing coupled equations
Expand Down
27 changes: 15 additions & 12 deletions docs/src/inverse_problems/structural_identifiability.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,4 +1,7 @@
# [Structural Identifiability Analysis](@id structural_identifiability)
!!! note
Due to recent changes in upstream packages, this Catalyst feature is currently broken on Catalyst v14.

During parameter fitting, parameter values are inferred from data. Parameter identifiability refers to whether inferring parameter values for a given model is mathematically feasible. Ideally, parameter fitting should always be accompanied with an identifiability analysis of the problem.

Identifiability can be divided into *structural* and *practical* identifiability[^1]. Structural identifiability considers only the mathematical model, and which parameters are and are not inherently identifiable due to model structure. Practical identifiability also considers the available data, and determines what system quantities can be inferred from it. In the idealised case of an infinite amount of non-noisy data, practical identifiability converges to structural identifiability. Generally, structural identifiability is assessed before parameters are fitted, while practical identifiability is assessed afterwards.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -31,7 +34,7 @@ Global identifiability can be assessed using the `assess_identifiability` functi
- Unidentifiable.

To it, we provide our `ReactionSystem` model and a list of quantities that we are able to measure. Here, we consider a Goodwind oscillator (a simple 3-component model, where the three species $M$, $E$, and $P$ are produced and degraded, which may exhibit oscillations)[^2]. Let us say that we are able to measure the concentration of $M$, we then designate this using the `measured_quantities` argument. We can now assess identifiability in the following way:
```@example si1
```julia
using Catalyst, Logging, StructuralIdentifiability
gwo = @reaction_network begin
(pₘ/(1+P), dₘ), 0 <--> M
Expand All @@ -43,14 +46,14 @@ assess_identifiability(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M], loglevel = Logging.Error
From the output, we find that `E(t)`, `pₑ`, and `pₚ` (the trajectory of $E$, and the production rates of $E$ and $P$, respectively) are non-identifiable. Next, `dₑ` and `dₚ` (the degradation rates of $E$ and $P$, respectively) are locally identifiable. Finally, `P(t)`, `M(t)`, `pₘ`, and `dₘ` (the trajectories of `P` and `M`, and the production and degradation rate of `M`, respectively) are all globally identifiable. We note that we also imported the Logging.jl package, and provided the `loglevel = Logging.Error` input argument. StructuralIdentifiability functions generally provide a large number of output messages. Hence, we will use this argument (which requires the Logging package) throughout this tutorial to decrease the amount of printed text.

Next, we also assess identifiability in the case where we can measure all three species concentrations:
```@example si1
```julia
assess_identifiability(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M, :P, :E], loglevel = Logging.Error)
```
in which case all species trajectories and parameters become identifiable.

### [Indicating known parameters](@id structural_identifiability_gi_known_ps)
In the previous case we assumed that all parameters are unknown, however, this is not necessarily true. If there are parameters with known values, we can supply these using the `known_p` argument. Providing this additional information might also make other, previously unidentifiable, parameters identifiable. Let us consider the previous example, where we measure the concentration of $M$ only, but now assume we also know the production rate of $E$ ($pₑ$):
```@example si1
```julia
assess_identifiability(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M], known_p = [:pₑ], loglevel = Logging.Error)
```
Not only does this turn the previously non-identifiable `pₑ` (globally) identifiable (which is obvious, given that its value is now known), but this additional information improve identifiability for several other network components.
Expand All @@ -59,45 +62,45 @@ To, in a similar manner, indicate that certain initial conditions are known is a

### [Providing non-trivial measured quantities](@id structural_identifiability_gi_nontrivial_mq)
Sometimes, ones may not have measurements of species, but rather some combinations of species (or possibly parameters). To account for this, `measured_quantities` accepts any algebraic expression (and not just single species). To form such expressions, species and parameters have to first be `@unpack`'ed from the model. Say that we have a model where an enzyme ($E$) is converted between an active and inactive form, which in turns activates the production of a product, $P$:
```@example si1
```julia
rs = @reaction_network begin
(kA,kD), Eᵢ <--> Eₐ
(Eₐ, d), 0 <-->P
end
```
If we can measure the total amount of $E$ ($=Eᵢ+Eₐ$), as well as the amount of $P$, we can use the following to assess identifiability:
```@example si1
```julia
@unpack Eᵢ, Eₐ = rs
assess_identifiability(rs; measured_quantities = [Eᵢ + Eₐ, :P], loglevel = Logging.Error)
nothing # hide
```

### [Assessing identifiability for specified quantities only](@id structural_identifiability_gi_ftc)
By default, StructuralIdentifiability assesses identifiability for all parameters and variables. It is, however, possible to designate precisely which quantities you want to check using the `funcs_to_check` option. This both includes selecting a smaller subset of parameters and variables to check, or defining customised expressions. Let us consider the Goodwind from previously, and say that we would like to check whether the production parameters ($pₘ$, $pₑ$, and $pₚ$) and the total amount of the three species ($P + M + E$) are identifiable quantities. Here, we would first unpack these (allowing us to form algebraic expressions) and then use the following code:
```@example si1
```julia
@unpack pₘ, pₑ, pₚ, M, E, P = gwo
assess_identifiability(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M], funcs_to_check = [pₘ, pₑ, pₚ, M + E + P], loglevel = Logging.Error)
nothing # hide
```

### [Probability of correctness](@id structural_identifiability_gi_probs)
The identifiability methods used can, in theory, produce erroneous results. However, it is possible to adjust the lower bound for the probability of correctness using the argument `prob_threshold` (by default set to `0.99`, that is, at least a $99\%$ chance of correctness). We can e.g. increase the bound through:
```@example si1
```julia
assess_identifiability(gwo; measured_quantities=[:M], prob_threshold = 0.999, loglevel = Logging.Error)
nothing # hide
```
giving a minimum bound of $99.9\%$ chance of correctness. In practise, the bounds used by StructuralIdentifiability are very conservative, which means that while the minimum guaranteed probability of correctness in the default case is $99\%$, in practise it is much higher. While increasing the value of `prob_threshold` increases the certainty of correctness, it will also increase the time required to assess identifiability.

## [Local identifiability analysis](@id structural_identifiability_lit)
Local identifiability can be assessed through the `assess_local_identifiability` function. While this is already determined by `assess_identifiability`, assessing local identifiability only has the advantage that it is easier to compute. Hence, there might be models where global identifiability analysis fails (or takes a prohibitively long time), where instead `assess_local_identifiability` can be used. This function takes the same inputs as `assess_identifiability` and returns, for each quantity, `true` if it is locally identifiable (or `false` if it is not). Here, for the Goodwind oscillator, we assesses it for local identifiability only:
```@example si1
```julia
assess_local_identifiability(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M], loglevel = Logging.Error)
```
We note that the results are consistent with those produced by `assess_identifiability` (with globally or locally identifiable quantities here all being assessed as at least locally identifiable).

## [Finding identifiable functions](@id structural_identifiability_identifiabile_funcs)
Finally, StructuralIdentifiability provides the `find_identifiable_functions` function. Rather than determining the identifiability of each parameter and unknown of the model, it finds a set of identifiable functions, such as any other identifiable expression of the model can be generated by these. Let us again consider the Goodwind oscillator, using the `find_identifiable_functions` function we find that identifiability can be reduced to five globally identifiable expressions:
```@example si1
```julia
find_identifiable_functions(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M], loglevel = Logging.Error)
```
Again, these results are consistent with those produced by `assess_identifiability`. There, `pₑ` and `pₚ` where found to be globally identifiable. Here, they correspond directly to identifiable expressions. The remaining four parameters (`pₘ`, `dₘ`, `dₑ`, and `dₚ`) occur as part of more complicated composite expressions.
Expand All @@ -106,19 +109,19 @@ Again, these results are consistent with those produced by `assess_identifiabili

## [Creating StructuralIdentifiability compatible ODE models from Catalyst `ReactionSystem`s](@id structural_identifiability_si_odes)
While the functionality described above covers the vast majority of analysis that user might want to perform, the StructuralIdentifiability package supports several additional features. While these does not have inherent Catalyst support, we do provide the `make_si_ode` function to simplify their use. Similar to the previous functions, it takes a `ReactionSystem`, lists of measured quantities, and known parameter values. The output is a [ODE of the standard form supported by StructuralIdentifiability](https://docs.sciml.ai/StructuralIdentifiability/stable/tutorials/creating_ode/#Defining-the-model-using-@ODEmodel-macro). It can be created using the following syntax:
```@example si1
```julia
si_ode = make_si_ode(gwo; measured_quantities = [:M])
nothing # hide
```
and then used as input to various StructuralIdentifiability functions. In the following example we use StructuralIdentifiability's `print_for_DAISY` function, printing the model as an expression that can be used by the [DAISY](https://daisy.dei.unipd.it/) software for identifiability analysis[^3].
```@example si1
```julia
print_for_DAISY(si_ode)
nothing # hide
```

## [Notes on systems with conservation laws](@id structural_identifiability_conslaws)
Several reaction network models, such as
```@example si3
```julia
using Catalyst, Logging, StructuralIdentifiability # hide
rs = @reaction_network begin
(k1,k2), X1 <--> X2
Expand Down
21 changes: 12 additions & 9 deletions test/extensions/bifurcation_kit.jl
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -56,32 +56,35 @@ end
# Checks that the same bifurcation problem is created as for BifurcationKit.
# Checks with Symbolics as bifurcation and plot vars.
# Tries setting `jac=false`.
# Note: Only one parameter used, as tests technically depended on internal parameter ordering
# (Potentially the test should also be removed as it tests internal parameter stuff, however, test
# was written a while ago when I paid less attention to this kind of stuff.)
let
# Creates BifurcationProblem via Catalyst.
bistable_switch = @reaction_network begin
0.1 + hill(X,v,K,n), 0 --> X
d, X --> 0
0.1 + hill(X,5.0,K,3), 0 --> X
1.0, X --> 0
end
@unpack X, v, K, n, d = bistable_switch
@unpack X, K = bistable_switch
u0_guess = [X => 1.0]
p_start = [v => 5.0, K => 2.5, n => 3, d => 1.0]
p_start = [K => 2.5]
Comment on lines +65 to +70
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do multiple parameters that are symbolic no longer work with the extension? Why do you need to change the parameters to hard-coded values?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, still work (see other tests).

The problem is that I wrote a test which evaluates some internal MTK functions and check that they return the same stuff. However, this kind of depended on ordering, and the test fails due to the parameter ordering not being right. I changed the this test so that there was only a single parameter (so that parameter ordering is not really a worry).

Probably the test should just be removed instead, but for now I just tried to make a minimal change.

bprob = BifurcationProblem(bistable_switch, u0_guess, p_start, K; jac=false, plot_var=X)

# Creates BifurcationProblem via BifurcationKit.
function bistable_switch_BK(u, p)
X, = u
v, K, n, d = p
return [0.1 + v*(X^n)/(X^n + K^n) - d*X]
K, = p
return [0.1 + 5.0*(X^3)/(X^3 + K^3) - 1.0*X]
end
bprob_BK = BifurcationProblem(bistable_switch_BK, [1.0], [5.0, 2.5, 3, 1.0], (@lens _[1]); record_from_solution = (x, p) -> x[1])
bprob_BK = BifurcationProblem(bistable_switch_BK, [1.0], [2.5], (@lens _[1]); record_from_solution = (x, p) -> x[1])

# Check the same function have been generated.
bprob.u0 == bprob_BK.u0
bprob.params == bprob_BK.params
for repeat = 1:20
u0 = rand(rng, 1)
p = rand(rng, 4)
@test bprob_BK.VF.F(u0, p) == bprob.VF.F(u0, p)
p = rand(rng, 1)
@test bprob_BK.VF.F(u0, p) bprob.VF.F(u0, p)
end
end

Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions test/extensions/homotopy_continuation.jl
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -96,12 +96,12 @@ let
v*(0.1/v + hill(X,1,K,n)), 0 --> X
d, X --> 0
end
ps = [:v => 5.0, :K => 2.5, :n => 3, :d => 1.0]
ps = Dict([:v => 5.0, :K => 2.5, :n => 3, :d => 1.0])
sss = hc_steady_states(rs, ps; filter_negative = false, show_progress = false, seed = 0x000004d1)

@test length(sss) == 4
for ss in sss
@test f_eval(rs,sss[1], last.(ps), 0.0)[1] ≈ 0.0 atol = 1e-12
@test ps[:v]*(0.1/ps[:v] + ss[1]^ps[:n]/(ss[1]^ps[:n] + ps[:K]^ps[:n])) - ps[:d]*ss[1]≈ 0.0 atol = 1e-12
end

ps = [:v => 5.0, :K => 2.5, :n => 2.7, :d => 1.0]
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion test/runtests.jl
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ using SafeTestsets, Test
# Tests extensions.
@time @safetestset "BifurcationKit Extension" begin include("extensions/bifurcation_kit.jl") end
@time @safetestset "HomotopyContinuation Extension" begin include("extensions/homotopy_continuation.jl") end
@time @safetestset "Structural Identifiability Extension" begin include("extensions/structural_identifiability.jl") end
# @time @safetestset "Structural Identifiability Extension" begin include("extensions/structural_identifiability.jl") end

# Tests stability computation (uses HomotopyContinuation extension).
@time @safetestset "Steady State Stability Computations" begin include("miscellaneous_tests/stability_computation.jl") end
Expand Down
Loading