The Lost Art of Mathematical Modelling
Linn\'ea Gyllingberg, Abeba Birhane, and David J.T. Sumpter

TL;DR
The paper critiques current mathematical biology practices, emphasizing the need to revive creative modelling by adopting an open, pluralistic approach that balances model formulation, analysis, and data fitting.
Contribution
It advocates for a shift towards open, pluralistic modelling in biology, highlighting the importance of creative formulation over excessive analysis.
Findings
Current focus on model analysis limits biological understanding
Open modelling approach reveals multiple ways to represent phenomena
Case study on fish locomotion illustrates open modelling benefits
Abstract
We provide a critique of mathematical biology in light of rapid developments in modern machine learning. We argue that out of the three modelling activities -- (1) formulating models; (2) analysing models; and (3) fitting or comparing models to data -- inherent to mathematical biology, researchers currently focus too much on activity (2) at the cost of (1). This trend, we propose, can be reversed by realising that any given biological phenomena can be modelled in an infinite number of different ways, through the adoption of an open/pluralistic approach. We explain the open approach using fish locomotion as a case study and illustrate some of the pitfalls -- universalism, creating models of models, etc. -- that hinder mathematical biology. We then ask how we might rediscover a lost art: that of creative mathematical modelling. This article is dedicated to the memory of Edmund Crampin.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsPhilosophy and History of Science · Gene Regulatory Network Analysis · Cell Image Analysis Techniques
