Discrete-state, continuous-time Markov models are widely used in the modeling of biochemical reaction networks. Their complexity often precludes analytic solution, and we rely on stochastic simulation algorithms (SSA) to estimate system statistics. The Gillespie algorithm is exact, but computationally costly as it simulates every single reaction. As such, approximate stochastic simulation algorithms such as the tau-leap algorithm are often used. Potentially computationally more efficient, the system statistics generated suffer from significant bias unless tau is relatively small, in which case the computational time can be comparable to that of the Gillespie algorithm. The multi-level method [Anderson and Higham, “Multi-level Monte Carlo for continuous time Markov chains, with applications in biochemical kinetics,” SIAM Multiscale Model. Simul. 10(1), 146–179 (2012)] tackles this problem. A base estimator is computed using many (cheap) sample paths at low accuracy. The bias inherent in this estimator is then reduced using a number of corrections. Each correction term is estimated using a collection of paired sample paths where one path of each pair is generated at a higher accuracy compared to the other (and so more expensive). By sharing random variables between these paired paths, the variance of each correction estimator can be reduced. This renders the multi-level method very efficient as only a relatively small number of paired paths are required to calculate each correction term. In the original multi-level method, each sample path is simulated using the tau-leap algorithm with a fixed value of τ. This approach can result in poor performance when the reaction activity of a system changes substantially over the timescale of interest. By introducing a novel adaptive time-stepping approach where τ is chosen according to the stochastic behaviour of each sample path, we extend the applicability of the multi-level method to such cases. We demonstrate the efficiency of our method using a number of examples.

1.
M. B.
Elowitz
,
A. J.
Levine
,
E. D.
Siggia
, and
P. S.
Swain
, “
Stochastic gene expression in a single cell
,”
Science
297
(
5584
),
1183
(
2002
).
2.
N.
Fedoroff
and
W.
Fontana
, “
Small numbers of big molecules
,”
Science
297
(
5584
),
1129
1131
(
2002
).
3.
A.
Arkin
,
J.
Ross
, and
H. H.
McAdams
, “
Stochastic kinetic analysis of developmental pathway bifurcation in phage λ-infected Escherichia coli cells
,”
Genetics
149
(
4
),
1633
1648
(
1998
).
4.
M.
Barrio
,
K.
Burrage
,
A.
Leier
, and
T.
Tian
, “
Oscillatory regulation of hes1: Discrete stochastic delay modelling and simulation
,”
PLoS Comput. Biol.
2
(
9
),
e117
(
2006
).
5.
D. T.
Gillespie
, “
Stochastic chemical kinetics
,” in
Handbook of Materials Modeling
, edited by
S.
Yip
(
Springer
,
Netherlands
,
2005
), pp.
1735
1752
.
6.
R.
Erban
,
S. J.
Chapman
,
I. G.
Kevrekidis
, and
T.
Vejchodskỳ
, “
Analysis of a stochastic chemical system close to a sniper bifurcation of its mean-field model
,”
SIAM J. Appl. Math.
70
(
3
),
984
1016
(
2009
).
7.
T.
Jahnke
and
W.
Huisinga
, “
Solving the chemical master equation for monomolecular reaction systems analytically
,”
J. Math. Biol.
54
(
1
),
1
26
(
2007
).
8.
D. T.
Gillespie
, “
Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions
,”
J. Phys. Chem.
81
(
25
),
2340
2361
(
1977
).
9.
D. T.
Gillespie
, “
Approximate accelerated stochastic simulation of chemically reacting systems
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
115
(
4
),
1716
1733
(
2001
).
10.
D. F.
Anderson
and
D. J.
Higham
, “
Multi-level Monte Carlo for continuous time Markov chains, with applications in biochemical kinetics
,”
SIAM Multiscale Model. Simul.
10
(
1
),
146
179
(
2012
).
11.
M. B.
Giles
, “
Multilevel Monte Carlo path simulation
,”
Oper. Res.
56
(
3
),
607
617
(
2008
).
12.
M. B.
Giles
, “
Multilevel Monte Carlo methods
,”
Acta Numer.
(to be published).
13.
D. J.
Higham
, “
Modeling and simulating chemical reactions
,”
SIAM Rev.
50
(
2
),
347
368
(
2008
).
14.
T. G.
Kurtz
, “
Representations of Markov processes as multiparameter time changes
,”
Ann. Probab.
8
,
682
715
(
1980
).
15.
J. M.
McCollum
,
G. D.
Peterson
,
C. D.
Cox
,
M. L.
Simpson
, and
N. F.
Samatova
, “
The sorting direct method for stochastic simulation of biochemical systems with varying reaction execution behavior
,”
Comput. Biol. Chem.
30
(
1
),
39
49
(
2006
).
16.
H.
Li
and
L.
Petzold
, “
Logarithmic direct method for discrete stochastic simulation of chemically reacting systems
,”
Technical Report, UCSB
,
2006
.
17.
C. A.
Yates
and
G.
Klingbeil
, “
Recycling random numbers in the stochastic simulation algorithm
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
138
(
9
),
094103
(
2013
).
18.
M. A.
Gibson
and
J.
Bruck
, “
Efficient exact stochastic simulation of chemical systems with many species and many channels
,”
J. Phys. Chem. A
104
(
9
),
1876
1889
(
2000
).
19.
Y.
Cao
,
D. T.
Gillespie
, and
L. R.
Petzold
, “
Efficient step size selection for the tau-leaping simulation method
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
124
(
4
),
044109
(
2006
).
20.
Y.
Cao
,
D. T.
Gillespie
, and
L. R.
Petzold
, “
Adaptive explicit-implicit tau-leaping method with automatic tau selection
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
126
(
22
),
224101
(
2007
).
21.
Y.
Cao
,
H.
Li
, and
L. R.
Petzold
, “
Efficient formulation of the stochastic simulation algorithm for chemically reacting systems
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
121
(
9
),
4059
4067
(
2004
).
22.
C.
Lester
,
R. E.
Baker
,
M. B.
Giles
, and
C. A.
Yates
, “A guide to efficient discrete-state multi-level simulation of stochastic biological systems,” e-print arXiv:1412.4069.
23.
T.
Tian
and
K.
Burrage
, “
Binomial leap methods for simulating stochastic chemical kinetics
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
121
,
10356
(
2004
).
24.
A.
Moraes
,
R.
Tempone
, and
P.
Vilanova
, “
Hybrid Chernoff tau-leap
,”
Multiscale Model. Simul.
12
(
2
),
581
615
(
2014
).
25.
D. F.
Anderson
, “
A modified next reaction method for simulating chemical systems with time-dependent propensities and delays
,”
J. Chem. Phys.
127
(
21
),
214107
(
2007
).
You do not currently have access to this content.