Inserire una breve descrizione delle modifiche fatte
(Richiesto)
Minor changes are by default collapsed in the page history.
No changes
The page does not exist yet.
Failed to load changes
Version by on
Leave Collaboration
Are you sure you want to leave the realtime collaboration and continue editing alone? The changes you save while editing alone will lead to merge conflicts with the changes auto-saved by the realtime editing session.
Marco Bernardo, Pierpaolo Degano, Gianluigi Zavattaro (a cura di)
Formal Methods for Computational Systems Biology, pp. 81–124
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5016
Springer
2008
Diverse hierarchies play a role in modeling and simulation for computational biology, e.g. categories, abstraction hierarchies, and composition hierarchies. Composition hierarchies seem a natural and straightforward focus for our exploration. What are model components and the requirements for a composite approach? How far do they support the quest for building blocks in computational biology? Modeling formalisms provide different means for composing a model. We will illuminate this with DEVS (Discrete event systems specification) and the pi calculus. Whereas in DEVS distinctions are emphasized, e.g. between a system and its environment, between properties attributed to a system and the system itself, these distinctions become fluent in the compact description of the pi calculus. However, both share the problem that in order to support a comfortable modeling, a series of extensions have been developed which also influence their possibility to support a hierarchical modeling. Thus, not individual formalisms but two families of formalisms and how they support a composite modeling will be presented. In computational biology one type of composite model deserves a closer inspection, as it brings together the wish to compose models and the need to describe a system at different levels in a unique manner, i.e. multi-level models.