EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 365 (2026) EPJ Web Conf., 365 (2026) 06002 References
Open Access
Issue
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 365, 2026
BPU12 Congress – 12th General Conferences of the Balkan Physical Union
Article Number 06002
Number of page(s) 16
Section Interdisciplinary Physics, Mathematical and Computational Methods
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202636506002
Published online 15 April 2026
  1. Dutta, Rongting Yue and Abhishek. Computational systems biology in disease modeling and control, review and perspectives. npj Systems Biology and Applications, Vol. 8, pp. 37, 2022; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41540-022-00247-4. [Google Scholar]
  2. Trong-The Nguyen, Thi-Kien Dao, Duc-Tinh Pham, and Thi-Hoan Duong. Exploring the Molecular Terrain: A Survey of Analytical Methods for Biological Network Analysis. 4, Symmetry, Vol. 16, pp. 462, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16040462. [Google Scholar]
  3. Albert, Reka. Network Inference, Analysis, and Modeling in Systems Biology. 11, s.l.: PubMed, The Plant Cell, Vol. 19, pp. 3327–338, Nov. 2007. doi: 10.1105/tpc.107.054700. [Google Scholar]
  4. Mustafa Ozen, Effat S. Emamian, & Ali Abdi. From Data to Knowledge: A MiniReview on Molecular Network Modeling and Analysis for Therapeutic Target Discovery. Archives of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Vol. 5, (1), pp. 36–43; 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33696/Pharmacol.4.043. ISSN: 2688-9609. [Google Scholar]
  5. Kauffman, S. A. Metabolic stability and epigenesis in randomly constructed genetic nets. Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 22, (3), pp. 437–467; 1969. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5193(69)90015-0. [Google Scholar]
  6. Albert, R., & Othmer, H. G. The topology of the regulatory interactions predicts the expression pattern of the segment polarity genes in Drosophila melanogaster. Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 223, (1), pp. 1–18, 2003; DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5193(03)00105-0. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chaves, M., Sontag, E. D., & Albert, R. Methods of robustness analysis for Boolean models of gene control networks. IET Systems Biology, Vol. 1, (3), pp. 173–189; 2005. DOI: 10.1049/iet-syb:20050012. [Google Scholar]
  8. Dehmer, M., et al. Information Theory of Networks: Symmetry, Complexity, and Dynamics. Symmetry, Vol. 3, (2), pp. 123–145; 2011. DOI: 10.3390/sym3020123. [Google Scholar]
  9. Lo Surdo P, Iannuccelli M, Contino S, Castagnoli L, Licata L, Cesareni G, Perfetto L. SIGNOR 3.0, the SIGnaling network open resource 3.0: 2022 update. s.l. : PMID: 36243968., Oct. 16, 2022, Nucleic Acids Res., p. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac883. [Google Scholar]
  10. Sreedevi Chandrasekaran, Danail Bonchev. Network Topology Analysis of PostMortem Brain Microarrays Identifies More Alzheimer's Related Genes and MicroRNAs and Points to Novel Routes for Fighting with the Disease. s.l. : eCollection, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Vol. 11, (1), 2016. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144052. [Google Scholar]
  11. Organization, World Health. Global status report on the public health response to dementia. s.l. : WHO, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  12. Association, Alzheimer's. Alzheimer's disease facts and figures. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 4, Vol. 18, pp. 700–789, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ma'ayan, Avi. Introduction to Network Analysis in Systems Biology. 190, Science Signaling, Vol. 4, p. tr5. Sep. 13, 201. DOI: 10.1126/scisignal.2001965. [Google Scholar]
  14. Wynand Winterbach, Piet Van Mieghem, Marcel Reinders, Huijuan Wang & Dick de Ridder. Topology of molecular interaction networks. BMC Systems Biology, Vol. 7, (90), 2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-0509-7-90. ISSN: 1752-0509. [Google Scholar]
  15. Newman, M. E. J. Networks. (2nd ed.). s.l. : Oxford University Press., 2018. [Google Scholar]
  16. Nguyen, T.-T., Dao, T.-K., Pham, D.-T., & Duong, T.-H. Exploring the Molecular Terrain: A Survey of Analytical Methods for Biological Network Analysis. Symmetry, Vol. 16, (4), p. 462, 2024. DOI: 10.3390/sym16040462. [Google Scholar]
  17. Assieh Saadatpour, Réka Albert. Boolean modeling of biological regulatory networks: a methodology tutorial. 1, s.l. : PMID: 23142247, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Vol. 62, pp. 3–12, Jul. 15, 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2012.10.012. [Google Scholar]
  18. Fakhteh Ghanbarnejad, Konstantin Klemm. Impact of individual nodes in Boolean network dynamics. [ed.] EPL 99 58006, EPLA, Vol. 99, (5), 2012. [Google Scholar]
  19. Bock, M., & Giese, H. BooleSim: An interactive Boolean network simulator. s.l.: IEEE. Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI). pp. 1188–1193, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCI.2014.6968221. [Google Scholar]
  20. Helikar, T., & Rogers, J. A. ChemChains: a platform for simulation and analysis of biochemical networks aimed to laboratory scientists. BMC Systems Biology, Vol. 3, (1), p. 58, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  21. Proctor, C. J., & Gray, D. A. GSK3 and p53—is there a link in Alzheimer's disease? Molecular Neurodegeneration, Vol. 5, (1), p. 7, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  22. Saadatpour, A., & Albert, R. Boolean modeling of biological regulatory networks: a methodology tutorial. Methods, Vol. 62, (1), pp. 3–12, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2012.10.012. [Google Scholar]
  23. Naldi, A., Monteiro, P. T., & Thieffry, D. Computational methods in systems biology: from Boolean networks to multivalued models. Briefings in Bioinformatics, Vol. 19, (2), pp. 303–317, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbw114. [Google Scholar]
  24. Banerjee, A., & Jost, J. Symmetry and complexity of biological networks. Mathematical Biosciences, Vol. 211, (1), pp. 64–85, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  25. MacArthur, B. D., & Sánchez-García, R. J. Symmetry in complex networks. Discrete Applied Mathematics, Vol. 156, (18), pp. 3525–3531, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kauffman, S. A. The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. s.l.: Oxford University Press., 1993. [Google Scholar]
  27. Gates, A. J., & Rocha, L. M. Control of complex networks requires both structure and dynamics. Scientific Reports, Vol. 6., p. 24456, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kociaj, Inva. An Overview Methodology for Writing Suitable Boolean Rules for Protein Signaling Pathways. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Vol. 4, (2), pp. 691–705, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15157/IJITIS.2021.4.2.691-705. [Google Scholar]
  29. Helikar, T., Konvalina, J., Heidel, J., & Rogers, J. A. Emergent decision-making in biological signal transduction networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol. 105 (6), pp. 1913–1918, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  30. Chinnaiyan, A. M., O'Rourke, K., Tewari, M., & Dixit, V. M. FADD, a novel death domain-containing protein, interacts with the death domain of Fas and initiates apoptosis. Cell, Vol. 81, (4), pp. 505–512, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(95)90582-5. [Google Scholar]
  31. Boldin, M. P., Varfolomeev, E. E., Pancer, Z., Mett, I. L., Camonis, J. H., & Wallach, D. A novel protein that interacts with the death domain of Fas/APO1 contains a sequence motif related to the death domain. Journal of Biological Chemistry, Vol. 270, (44), pp. 26625–26628, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.270.44.26625. [Google Scholar]
  32. Li, H., Zhu, H., Xu, C., & Yuan, J. Cleavage of BID by caspase 8 mediates the mitochondrial damage in the Fas pathway of apoptosis. Cell, Vol. 94, (4), pp. 491–501, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81524-5. [Google Scholar]
  33. Slee, E. A., Adrain, C., & Martin, S. J. Executioner caspase-3, -6, and -7 perform distinct, non-redundant roles during the demolition phase of apoptosis. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, Vol. 276, (10), pp. 7320–7326, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M006678200. [Google Scholar]
  34. Wei, M. C., et al. Proapoptotic BAX and BAK: a requisite gateway to mitochondrial dysfunction and death. Science, Vol. 292, (5517), pp. 727–730, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1059108. [Google Scholar]
  35. Selkoe, D. J., & Wolfe, M. S. Presenilin: running with scissors in the membrane. Cell, Vol. 131, (2), pp. 215–221, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2007.10.004. [Google Scholar]
  36. Wolfe, M. S. y-Secretase and its modulators in Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Neurochermstry, Vol. 150, (5), pp. 612–625, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.14763. [Google Scholar]
  37. Hooper, C., Killick, R., & Lovestone, S. The GSK3 hypothesis of Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Neurochemistry, Vol. 104, (6), pp. 1433–1439, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-4159.2007.05194.x. [Google Scholar]
  38. Goll, D. E., Thompson, V. F., Li, H., Wei, W., & Cong, J. The calpain system. Physiological Reviews, Vol. 83, (3), pp. 731–801, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00029.2002. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ishiguro, K., Ohshima, T., Hasegawa, M., et al. Glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta is an essential kinase for tau phosphorylation in Alzheimer's disease. FEBS Letters, Vol. 333, (3), pp. 225–232, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-5793(93)81026-U. [Google Scholar]
  40. Patrick, G. N., Zukerberg, L., Nikolic, M., et al. Conversion of p35 to p25 deregulates Cdk5 activity and promotes neurodegeneration. Nature, Vol. 402, (6762), pp. 615–622, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1038/45172. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.