Search

The Potjans-Diesmann cortical microcircuit model is a widely used model originallyimplemented in NEST. Here, we re-implemented the model using NetPyNE, a high-level Python interface to the NEURON simulator, and reproduced the findings of theoriginal publication. We also implemented a method for rescaling the network sizewhich preserves first and second order statistics, building on existing work on networktheory. The new implementation enables using more detailed neuron models with mul-ticompartment morphologies and multiple biophysically realistic channels. This opensthe model to new research, including the study of dendritic processing, the influenceof individual channel parameters, and generally multiscale interactions in the network.The rescaling method provides flexibility to increase or decrease the network size ifrequired when running these more realistic simulations. Finally, NetPyNE facilitatesmodifying or extending the model using its declarative language; optimizing modelparameters; running efficient large-scale parallelized simulations; and analyzing themodel through built-in methods, including local field potential calculation and informa-tion flow measures.

Machine learning is increasingly recognized as a promising technology in the biological, biomedical, and behavioral sciences. There can be no argument that this technique is incredibly successful in image recognition with immediate applications in diagnostics including electrophysiology, radiology, or pathology, where we have access to massive amounts of annotated data. However, machine learning often performs poorly in prognosis, especially when dealing with sparse data. This is a field where classical physics-based simulation seems to remain irreplaceable. In this review, we identify areas in the biomedical sciences where machine learning and multiscale modeling can mutually benefit from one another: Machine learning can integrate physics-based knowledge in the form of governing equations, boundary conditions, or constraints to manage ill-posted problems and robustly handle sparse and noisy data; multiscale modeling can integrate machine learning to create surrogate models, identify system dynamics and parameters, analyze sensitivities, and quantify uncertainty to bridge the scales and understand the emergence of function. With a view towards applications in the life sciences, we discuss the state of the art of combining machine learning and multiscale modeling, identify applications and opportunities, raise open questions, and address potential challenges and limitations. We anticipate that it will stimulate discussion within the community of computational mechanics and reach out to other disciplines including mathematics, statistics, computer science, artificial intelligence, biomedicine, systems biology, and precision medicine to join forces towards creating robust and efficient models for biological systems.

Fueled by breakthrough technology developments, the biological, biomedical, and behavioral sciences are now collecting more data than ever before. There is a critical need for time- and cost-efficient strategies to analyze and interpret these data to advance human health. The recent rise of machine learning as a powerful technique to integrate multimodality, multifidelity data, and reveal correlations between intertwined phenomena presents a special opportunity in this regard. However, classical machine learning techniques often ignore the fundamental laws of physics and result in ill-posed problems or non-physical solutions. Multiscale modeling is a successful strategy to integrate multiscale, multiphysics data and uncover mechanisms that explain the emergence of function. However, multiscale modeling alone often fails to efficiently combine large data sets from different sources and different levels of resolution. We show how machine learning and multiscale modeling can complement each other to create robust predictive models that integrate the underlying physics to manage ill-posed problems and explore massive design spaces. We critically review the current literature, highlight applications and opportunities, address open questions, and discuss potential challenges and limitations in four overarching topical areas: ordinary differential equations, partial differential equations, data-driven approaches, and theory-driven approaches. Towards these goals, we leverage expertise in applied mathematics, computer science, computational biology, biophysics, biomechanics, engineering mechanics, experimentation, and medicine. Our multidisciplinary perspective suggests that integrating machine learning and multiscale modeling can provide new insights into disease mechanisms, help identify new targets and treatment strategies, and inform decision making for the benefit of human health.

Within the diverse interdisciplinary life sciences domains, semantic, workflow, and methodological ambiguities can prevent the appreciation of explanations of phenomena, handicap the use of computational models, and hamper communication among scientists, engineers, and the public. Members of the life sciences community commonly, and too often loosely, draw on "mechanistic model" and similar phrases when referring to the processes of discovering and establishing causal explanations of biological phenomena. Ambiguities in modeling and simulation terminology and methods diminish clarity, credibility, and the perceived significance of research findings. To encourage improved semantic and methodological clarity, we describe the spectrum of Mechanism-oriented Models being used to develop explanations of biological phenomena. We cluster them into three broad groups. We then expand the three groups into a total of seven workflow-related model types having clearly distinguishable features. We name each type and illustrate with diverse examples drawn from the literature. These model types are intended to contribute to the foundation of an ontology of mechanism-based simulation research in the life sciences. We show that it is within the model-development workflows that the different model types manifest and exert their scientific usefulness by enhancing and extending different forms and degrees of explanation. The process starts with knowledge about the phenomenon and continues with explanatory and mathematical descriptions. Those descriptions are transformed into software and used to perform experimental explorations by running and examining simulation output. The credibility of inferences is thus linked to having easy access to the scientific and technical provenance from each workflow stage., Comment: 29 pages, 6 figures, 47 references, and 7 suggestions for further reading