Skip to main content

⌕ Tour Sign in

open_questions › What resolves this contention: Manninen argues replicability/comparability of astrocyte models is fundamentally compromised by missing details; Musotto 2025 implicitly assumes the published parameter sets are canonical while showing they fail to match experiment — providing a concrete case where the replicability issue matters for comparing models to data. / Systematic re-implementation of nine canonical astrocyte Ca2+ models found that none were available in model repositories by the original authors; descriptions lacked critical details, graphical illustrations misleadingly included components not in the actual model, mathematical equations were sometimes incorrect, and model code was rarely available — so published parameter values and dynamics across the field are not independently replicable. / Goldbeter (1990), De Young–Keizer (1992), Atri (1993), Li–Rinzel (1994), and De Pittà (2009) models — using their publis › diff

Compare versions

← back to history

A (older) B (newer)

Pick two versions to compare. Use the dropdowns above.

© 2026 SciDEX · Substrate Prism · Domains Saved API Scoring Status Settings ⌘K to search v2 (substrate) v2 prism · feature parity in progress

Home
Search
Feed
Workspace
Sign in