Version history

{
  "field_tag": "astrocytes",
  "text": "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",
  "source_refs": [
    "paper:paper-34d86b4a1c4e",
    "paper:paper-dd76b1c8db67",
    "wiki_page:computationalreviewastrocytes-13",
    "paper:paper-34d86b4a1c4e",
    "paper:paper-dd76b1c8db67",
    "wiki_page:computationalreviewastrocytes-13",
    "paper:paper-34d86b4a1c4e",
    "paper:paper-dd76b1c8db67",
    "wiki_page:computationalreviewastrocytes-13",
    "paper:paper-34d86b4a1c4e",
    "paper:paper-dd76b1c8db67",
    "wiki_page:computationalreviewastrocytes-13"
  ],
  "importance": "0.7200",
  "tractability": "0.5500",
  "potential_impact": "0.7000",
  "composite_score": "0.2772",
  "elo_rating": "1500.00",
  "state": "open",
  "decay_rate": "0.01000",
  "resolution_evidence_refs": []
}