Difference between revisions of "Team:Paris Bettencourt/Modeling"
Line 262: | Line 262: | ||
To do the choice, we compare \(T_{1}\) and \(T_{2}\). The smallest time is the next event time. | To do the choice, we compare \(T_{1}\) and \(T_{2}\). The smallest time is the next event time. | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
− | + | <img src="hhttps://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/7/72/GeneralStochasticAlgorithm.png" height="420" style="float:right;" alt="Algorithm flowchart" title="Algorithm flowchart" > | |
− | <img src=" | + | |
<h5>Step 1 : Initialize the cells</h5> | <h5>Step 1 : Initialize the cells</h5> | ||
Line 339: | Line 338: | ||
In order to get relevant results, we average by doing a large number of simulations specified by the \(Averaging\) \(number\) parameter. | In order to get relevant results, we average by doing a large number of simulations specified by the \(Averaging\) \(number\) parameter. | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
− | We can only change three parameters : \(mu_{1}\), \( | + | We can only change three parameters : \(mu_{1}\), \(MC_0\) and \(DC_0\). |
<br /> | <br /> | ||
\(t\), \(\sigma_{1}\), \(mu_{2}\), \(\sigma_{2}\), \(mu_{3}\), \(\sigma_{3}\) and \(k_{4}\) are constants. | \(t\), \(\sigma_{1}\), \(mu_{2}\), \(\sigma_{2}\), \(mu_{3}\), \(\sigma_{3}\) and \(k_{4}\) are constants. | ||
Line 356: | Line 355: | ||
<li>\(\sigma_{3} = 0.1\)</li> | <li>\(\sigma_{3} = 0.1\)</li> | ||
<li>\(k_{4} = 1\)</li> | <li>\(k_{4} = 1\)</li> | ||
− | <li>\( | + | <li>\(MC_0 = 5\)</li> |
− | <li>\( | + | <li>\(DC_0 = 0\)</li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
Line 364: | Line 363: | ||
<img width="100%" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/0/0b/OptimizeK1Stochastic.png" title="Stochastic vitamin optimization" alt="Stochastic vitamin optimization" style="align:center;"> | <img width="100%" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/0/0b/OptimizeK1Stochastic.png" title="Stochastic vitamin optimization" alt="Stochastic vitamin optimization" style="align:center;"> | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
− | + | Here is a deterministic vitamin optimization. | |
− | + | ||
<br /> | <br /> | ||
+ | <img width="100%" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/c/ca/OptimizeK1StochasticDeterministic.png" title="Deterministic vitamin optimization" alt="Deterministic vitamin optimization" style="align:center;"> | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | We can compare the two results by superimposing the two graphs. | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | <img width="100%" src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2015/3/3c/CompareStochasticAndDeterministic.png" title="Comparison of deterministic and stochastic vitamin optimization" alt="Comparison of deterministic and stochastic vitamin optimization" style="align:center;"> | ||
+ | |||
<h3>Conclusion</h3> | <h3>Conclusion</h3> | ||
− | + | ||
+ | As we can see, the stochastic and the deterministic models prodvide <i>a priori</i> the same results. | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | We suggest to use both and compare the graphs. Indeed, when the initial parameters change, the results can be differents. | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | It is often the case when we computed the model with low \(MC_0\), for example \(MC_0 = 1\). It seems logical because of the statistical nature of the problem. | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | However, the comparison of the two graphs give us useful and accurate informations about the vitamin optimization. | ||
+ | <br /> | ||
+ | We are able to maximize the vitamin production by determining the best rate constant \(k_{1}\) and therefore the best doubling time \(\mu_{1}\) to set the differentiation rate. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h3>MATLAB algorithm</h3> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
<h3>Bibliography</h3> | <h3>Bibliography</h3> | ||
<ul> | <ul> |
Revision as of 11:29, 21 August 2015