François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005 Temporal Logic Constraints in the Biochemical Abstract Machine BIOCHAM François Fages, Project-team: Contraintes, INRIA Rocquencourt, France http://contraintes.inria.fr/ Joint work with : Nathalie Sylvain Laurence Chabrier-Rivier Soliman Calzone 2002-2004: ARC CPBIO “Process Calculi and Biology of Molecular Networks” A. Bockmayr, LORIA, V. Danos, CNRS PPS, V. Schächter, Genoscope Evry
33
Embed
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005 Temporal Logic Constraints in the Biochemical Abstract Machine BIOCHAM François Fages, Project-team: Contraintes, INRIA.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Temporal Logic Constraints in the Biochemical Abstract Machine BIOCHAM
Quantitative models: from differential equation systems to• Hybrid Petri nets [Hofestadt-Thelen 98, Matsuno et al. 00]
• Hybrid automata [Alur et al. 01, Ghosh-Tomlin 01]
• Hybrid concurrent constraint languages [Bockmayr-Courtois 01]
• Rules with continuous dynamics BIOCHAM-2 [Chabrier-Fages-Soliman 04]
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Outline of the Presentation
1. Introduction
2. Biocham Rule Language for Modeling Biochemical Systems 1. Syntax of objects and reactions2. Semantics at 3 abstraction levels: Boolean, Concentrations,
Populations
3. Biocham Temporal Logic for Formalizing Biological Properties1. CTL for Boolean semantics2. Constraint LTL for Concentration semantics
4. Learning Rules and Parameters from Temporal Properties1. Learning reaction rules from CTL specification2. Learning kinetic parameter values from Constraint-LTL specification
5. Conclusion and collaborations
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
2. Modeling Biochemical Systems
Small molecules: covalent bonds (outer electrons shared) 50-200 kcal/mol
denoting the presence/absence of molecules in the cell or compartment
• A Finite concurrent transition system [Shankar 93] to rules (asynchronous) over-approximating the set of all possible behaviors
A reaction A+B=>C+D is translated into 4 transition rules for the possibly complete consumption of reactants:
A+BA+B+C+D
A+BA+B +C+D
A+BA+B+C+D
A+BA+B+C+D
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Concentration Semantics
k1cc for _=>preMPF.
k3cc*[C25~{s1,s2}]*[preMPF] for preMPF=[C25~{s1,s2}]=>MPF.
(k14cc*[CKI]*[MPF],k15cc*[CKI-MPF]) for CKI+MPF<=>CKI-MPF.
k2cc*[preMPF] for preMPF=>_.
k2cc*[MPF] for MPF=>_.
k2u*[APC]*[MPF] for MPF=[APC]=>_.
k4cc*[Wee1]*[MPF] for MPF=[Wee1]=>preMPF.
…
parameter(k1cc,0.25).
…
present({preMPF, Wee1m}).
Compiles into an ODE system
(or a Stochastic Process under
the Population semantics)
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Plan
1. Biocham Rule Language for Modeling Biochemical Systems 1. Syntax of objects and reactions
2. Semantics at 3 abstraction levels: Boolean, Concentrations, Populations
2. Biocham Temporal Logic for Formalizing Biological Properties1. Computation Tree Logic for Boolean semantics
2. Constraint Linear Time Logic for Concentration semantics
3. Learning Rules and Parameters from Temporal Properties1. Learning reaction rules from CTL properties
2. Learning kinetic parameter values from Constraint LTL properties
4. Conclusion, collaborations
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
2. Formalizing Biological Properties in Temporal Logics
Boolean Semantics: Computation Tree Logic CTL
Time
Non-determinism E, A
F,G,U EF
EU
AG
Choice
Time
E
exists
A
always
X
next time
EX()
AX()
AX()
F
finally
EF()
AG()
AF()
G
globally
EG()
AF( )
AG()
U
untilE (U ) A (U )
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Biological Properties formalized in CTL [Chabrier Fages 03]
About reachability:
• Can the cell produce some protein P? reachable(P)==EF(P)
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Biological Properties formalized in CTL [Chabrier Fages 03]
About reachability:
• Can the cell produce some protein P? reachable(P)==EF(P)
About pathways:
• Is it possible to produce P without having Q? E(Q U P)• Is state s2 a necessary checkpoint for reaching state s?
checkpoint(s2,s)== E(s2U s)
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Biological Properties formalized in CTL [Chabrier Fages 03]
About reachability:
• Can the cell produce some protein P? reachable(P)==EF(P)
About pathways:
• Is it possible to produce P without having Q? E(Q U P)• Is state s2 a necessary checkpoint for reaching state s?
checkpoint(s2,s)== E(s2U s)
About stationarity:
• Is a (partially described) state s a stable state? stable(s)== AG(s)
• Is s a steady state (with possibility of escaping) ? steady(s)==EG(s)
• Can the cell reach a stable state? EF(stable(s))
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Biological Properties formalized in CTL [Chabrier Fages 03]
About reachability:
• Can the cell produce some protein P? reachable(P)==EF(P)
About pathways:
• Is it possible to produce P without having Q? E(Q U P)• Is state s2 a necessary checkpoint for reaching state s?
checkpoint(s2,s)== E(s2U s)
About stationarity:
• Is a (partially described) state s a stable state? stable(s)== AG(s)
• Is s a steady state (with possibility of escaping) ? steady(s)==EG(s)
• Can the cell reach a stable state? EF(stable(s))
About oscillations (approximation without strong fairness):
• Can the system exhibit a cyclic behavior w.r.t. the presence of P ? oscillation(P)== EG((P EF P) ^ (P EF P))
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Cell Cycle Model-Checking
biocham: check_reachable(cdk46~{p1,p2}-cycD~{p1}). Ei(EF(cdk46~{p1,p2}-cycD~{p1})) is truebiocham: check_checkpoint(cdc25C~{p1,p2}, cdk1~{p1,p3}-cycB). Ai(!(E(!(cdc25C~{p1,p2}) U cdk1~{p1,p3}-cycB))) is truebiocham: nusmv(Ai(AG(!(cdk1~{p1,p2,p3}-cycB) -> checkpoint(Wee1, cdk1~{p1,p2,p3}-cycB))))). Ai(AG(!(cdk1~{p1,p2,p3}-cycB)->!(E(!(Wee1) U cdk1~{p1,p2,p3}-cycB)))) is falsebiocham: why.-- Loop starts here cycB-cdk1~{p1,p2,p3} is present cdk7 is present cycH is present cdk1 is present Myt1 is present cdc25C~{p1} is presentrule_114 cycB-cdk1~{p1,p2,p3}=[cdc25C~{p1}]=>cycB-cdk1~{p2,p3}. cycB-cdk1~{p2,p3} is present cycB-cdk1~{p1,p2,p3} is absentrule_74 cycB-cdk1~{p2,p3}=[Myt1]=>cycB-cdk1~{p1,p2,p3}. cycB-cdk1~{p2,p3} is absent cycB-cdk1~{p1,p2,p3} is present
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Cell Cycle Model-Checking
800 rules, 165 proteins and genes, 500 variables.
BIOCHAM-NuSMV symbolic model-checker time in seconds:
Initial state G2 Query: Time
compiling 29s
Reachability G1 EF CycE 2s
Reachability G1 EF CycD 1.9s
Reachability G1 EF PCNA-CycD 1.7s
Checkpoint
for mitosis complex
EF ( Cdc25~{Nterm}
U Cdk1~{Thr161}-CycB)
2.2s
Cycle EG ( (CycA EF CycA) ( CycA EF CycA))
31.8s
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Concentration Semantics: Constraint LTL
• Constraints over concentrations and derivatives as FOL formulae over the reals:
• [M] > 0.2
• [M]+[P] > [Q]
• d([M])/dt < 0
• Constraint LTL operators for time F, U, G (no non-determinism).• F([M]>0.2)
• FG([M]>0.2)
• F ([M]>2 & F (d([M])/dt<0 & F ([M]<2 & d([M])/dt>0 & F(d([M])/dt<0))))
• oscil(M,n)= F (d([M])/dt>0 & F(d([M])/dt<0 & … ))
• Language to formalize the relevant properties observed in experiments
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Outline
1. Biocham Rule Language for Modeling Biochemical Systems 1. Syntax of objects and reactions
2. Semantics at 3 abstraction levels: Boolean, Concentrations, Populations
2. Biocham Temporal Logic for Formalizing Biological Properties1. Computation Tree Logic for Boolean semantics
2. Constraint Linear Time Logic for Concentration semantics
3. Learning Rules and Kinetics from Temporal Properties1. Learning reaction rules
2. Learning kinetic parameter values
4. Conclusion, collaborations
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
3. Learning Rules from Temporal Properties
General framework of Theory Revision [de Raedt 92]
• Equality x=v true if xi≤v & xi+1≥v or if xi≥v & xi+1≤v
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Constraint-Based LTL (Forward) Model Checking
Hypothesis 1: the initial state is completely known
Hypothesis 2: the formula can be checked over a finite period of time [0,T]
Simple algorithm based on the trace of the numerical simulation:
1. Run the numerical simulation from 0 to T producing values at a finite sequence of time points
2. Iteratively label the time points with the sub-formulae of that are true:
Add to the time points where a FOL formula is true,
Add F to the previous time points labeled by Add U to the predecessor time points of while they satisfy (Add G to the states satisfying until T (optimistic abstraction…))
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Conclusion
The biochemical abstract machine BIOCHAM implements:
• A simple rule-based language for modeling biochemical processes with three abstraction levels:
• Boolean semantics: presence/absence of molecules• Molecule Concentration semantics (ODE)• Molecule Population semantics (stochastic)
• A powerful temporal logic language for formalizing biological properties• CTL (implemented with NuSMV model checker)• Constraint LTL (implemented in Prolog)
• An original machine learning system• Reaction rule discovery from CTL specification• Parameter estimation from constraint LTL specification
Issue of compositionality: model reuse in different contexts
Issue of abstraction/refinement: model simplification/decomposition
François Fages LOPSTR-SAS 2005
Collaborations
STREP APRIL 2: Applications of probabilistic inductive logic programming
Luc de Raedt, Freiburg, Stephen Muggleton, Imperial College London,…
• Learning in a probabilistic logic setting
NoE REWERSE: Reasoning on the web with rules and semantics
François Bry, Münich, Rolf Backofen Jena, Mike Schroeder Dresden,…
• Connecting Biocham to the semantic web: gene and protein ontologies
INRIA Bang, Jean Clairambault, Benoît Perthame
INSERM, Villejuif, Francis Lévi “Cancer chronotherapies”
ULB, Albert Goldbeter, Bruxelles
• Coupled models of cell cycle, circadian cycle, drugs.