I think in the current repository framework, variants are probably the way to go if you really want to have all the different cell types represented. However, if the only differences are parameter value changes then I'd be tempted to simply describe those changes in the model annotation/documentation and have just the one model in the repository to avoid cluttering the repository any more than necessary.
As Matt mentioned, the obvious solution is to use CellML 1.1 and import the base mathematical model into the different parameterisation models. Andre. James Lawson wrote: > Addendum: > > The model in the repository describes the apex cells only. > > James Lawson wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I'm just fishing for some comments on how to handle cases where there >> are models which describe, for example, the properties of multiple cell >> types. Bondarenko et al. 2004 is a good example of this: >> >> "In the Bondarenko et al. 2004 publication described here, the authors >> develop a computer model of the mouse ventricular action potential (see >> below). The model includes parameters for both the apex and the septum >> regions of the heart (the apex parameters have been substituted into the >> CellML version of the model described in ), and this helps to illustrate >> how there are regional differences in myocyte repolarisation in the >> mouse heart." >> >> Penny Noble has just sent me a zip file containing the latest versions >> of all the models she has curated for COR. I'm currently in the process >> of comparing these versions to the latest versions we have on the >> repository. In some cases, she has provided several variants of the same >> model which describe different cell types, as above. >> >> Firstly, are these true 'variants'? If so, then the matter is relatively >> simple. Unfortunately, if one goes through the repository list, variants >> simply come up as a duplication of the model listing, with no >> information concerning what the variant represents. This is something I >> imagine will be fixed in time, but is presently rather frustrating >> considering the issue at hand. >> >> Does anyone have any comments on this? Should I simply put the files up >> as different variants, with a note in the documentation? >> >> Thanks, >> James Lawson >> _______________________________________________ >> cellml-discussion mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion > > _______________________________________________ > cellml-discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion -- David Nickerson, PhD Research Fellow Division of Bioengineering Faculty of Engineering National University of Singapore Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ cellml-discussion mailing list [email protected] http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
