PEtab icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
PEtab copied to clipboard

Handling of local parameters

Open LeonardSchmiester opened this issue 5 years ago • 6 comments

At the moment, local parameters cannot be directly estimated within PEtab, as this requires unique parameter Ids. One would need to make them global parameters. Maybe instead we could use a unique naming scheme like in AMICI (${reaction_id}_${local_par_id}) to also allow for local parameters

LeonardSchmiester avatar Feb 25 '20 10:02 LeonardSchmiester

https://github.com/PEtab-dev/PEtab/blob/8b03c8f20c8042c5375adabfe23bab19c3a649b0/petab/sbml.py#L115 ?

FFroehlich avatar Feb 25 '20 14:02 FFroehlich

https://github.com/PEtab-dev/PEtab/blob/8b03c8f20c8042c5375adabfe23bab19c3a649b0/petab/sbml.py#L115 ?

Good catch. So far unused here. Legacy... And from before I knew that libsbml already implements that same functionality.

Question is mostly if we want to handle local parameters that way.

dweindl avatar Feb 25 '20 14:02 dweindl

Is there a disadvantage with this and would there be another good option?

JanHasenauer avatar Mar 21 '20 14:03 JanHasenauer

Is there a disadvantage with this and would there be another good option?

Disadvantage of allowing for local parameters: They don't necessarily have a unique ID. It's a per-reaction namespace. In PEtab we'd need globally identifiable parameter IDs. The common way is using ${reaction_id}_${local_par_id}, but this is still not necessarily unique.

dweindl avatar Mar 21 '20 19:03 dweindl

Okay, but this is a problem of local parameters in general but not the suggested implementation. As we want to support available SBML models, we should in my opinion also support local parameters.

The common was sounds good and we should then be check for uniqueness.

JanHasenauer avatar Mar 23 '20 18:03 JanHasenauer

The changes proposed in #538 also provide a means to handle local parameters.

dweindl avatar Mar 18 '22 14:03 dweindl