Representation of Boolean functions and models
A Boolean model consists of
• N species X1, X2, ...., XN, e.g. genes, proteins, etc., each represented by a variable xi taking values in {0, 1},
• for each species
Xi a set of species

that influence
xi and
• for each species Xi an update function
giving the value of
xi at the next time step for every possible combination of

.
In the following we think of
Bi as a function on the vertices of the unit cube. Since vertex

corresponds to the AND gate
we can write Bi in the form
This is a so-called
sum-of-product representation of
Bi. These representations are especially convenient, as they allow to graphically represent our models using
interaction hypergraphs [
6]. The idea is to represent each product (AND gate) in the sum-of-product form of
Bi by a directed hyperedge between a set of start nodes

and the end node
Xi. Each pair (
s,
Xi),
s
S, carries a sign — '+' or '-' — depending on whether there is a factor
s or ¬
s in the product. All incoming hyperedges at node
Xi are then a graphical representation of
Bi. This is further illustrated in Additional data file
1.
The general approach to making discrete models continuous
The first step for obtaining a continuous model from a Boolean one is to replace the discrete variables
xi by continuous variables

taking values in [0, 1], i.e. we normalize concentrations to the unit interval. Consequently, we have to 'extend' the functions
Bi to functions

: [0, 1]
N → [0, 1]. We call the functions
continuous homologues of the Boolean functions
Bi. The crucial point is, how the transformation of a Boolean function into a continuous homologue is performed. We will address this issue in the next section and continue with the outline of the general approach.
In the second step we have to specify how to build the actual continuous model, for which there are two possibilities. The most straightforward is probably to proceed analogously to the Boolean model, i.e. to use discrete time steps and to compute the value of

at time
t + 1 by
In numeric simulations the discretization of time is obviously irrelevant. It complicates, however, the detection of small-scale continuous effects and is a serious drawback in the further investigation of the model by analytical methods.
Another way to build the continuous model is to try to mimic biological reality more closely: mRNAs, proteins, etc. are produced at a certain rate and are at the same time degraded. We assume the production of
Xi to be given by

, and the degradation to be proportional to

. Then the development of

over time is governed by the ordinary differential equation (ODE)
where
τi can be interpreted as the life-time of species
Xi. Note that due to the normalization of concentrations to the unit interval we have only one parameter for production as well as decay. To clarify this, assume that

denotes the non-normalized concentrations and

the corresponding production functions. Then a general system of ODEs is of the form

, where
αi is the production rate and
γi the decay rate of species
Xi. Since the maximal concentration of
Xi is
αi/
γi we have the relation

. It now follows that
and by setting
τi = 1/
γi and

we obtain the ODEs (2).
Herein we focus on model (2), as this model can be further analyzed using the rich and mathematically rigorous theory of ODEs. Note furthermore that model (1) can be considered a special case of model (2) after numeric integration.
Continuous homologues of Boolean functions
As already mentioned, the key point is how a continuous homologue

can be obtained from a Boolean function
Bi in a computationally efficient manner. A suitable transformation has to satisfy three conditions:
Accuracy: It has to be accurate, which means that

and
Bi must agree on the vertices of the unit cube, i.e. for values in

. Functions

satisfying this condition are called
perfect continuous homologues. As will be shown, for perfect continuous homologues discrete and continuous models exhibit a similar steady-state behavior.
Good analytical properties: The functions

should have good analytical properties such as smoothness in order to allow and facilitate a mathematical analysis of the system of ODEs.
Minimality and uniqueness: The functions

should be the unique minimal solution in their interpolation class.
The three transformations we propose in the following are all based on multivariate polynomial interpolation [
13,
14] (see Methods). Here

is defined as a polynomial in the variables

that agrees with
Bi on the vertices of the unit cube. As will be shown in the Methods section, this technique satisfies all three of the above requirements. There are other approaches which we shortly review and compare in the Discussion section.
BooleCube
In a first step, we define the functions
by linearly interpolating the functions
Bi using the technique of multivariate polynomial interpolation as explained in the Methods section. These functions are called
BooleCubes. By substituting

for
Bi in equation (2), we can then define a system of ODEs that describes the temporal development of the

.
HillCube
The functions

are affine multilinear, i.e. for each 1 ≤
j ≤
Ni and fixed

,
k ≠
j, there exist constants
a,
b

such that

. Molecular interactions, however, are known to show a switch-like behavior, which can be modeled using sigmoid shaped
Hill functions 
[
15] (see Additional data file
2). The two parameters
n and
k have a clear biological meaning. The Hill coefficient
n determines the slope of the curve and is a measure of the cooperativity of the interaction. The parameter
k corresponds to the threshold in the Boolean model, above which one defines the state of a species as 'on'. Mathematically speaking, it is the value at which the activation is half maximal.
We now define a Hill function fij with parameters nij and kij for every interaction and define new functions
which we call
HillCubes. Plots of the HillCubes of all 16 two-variable Boolean gates can be found in Additional data file
3. Now a new system of ODEs can be defined by replacing the

in equation (2) by the HillCubes

.
normalized HillCube
Note that Hill functions never assume the value 1, but approach it asymptotically. Hence, the HillCubes are not perfect homologues of the Boolean update functions Bi. If this is desired a simple solution is to normalize the Hill functions to the unit interval. This yields another (perfect) continuous homologue of the
Boolean functions Bi
which we call normalized HillCubes, and thus defines also a new continuous ODE model.
Theoretical results about the relation between discrete and continuous models
A natural and interesting question is how similar the discrete and the continuous model are. It can easily be shown (see Methods and [
11]) that, whenever the

in equation (2) are perfect homologues of the Boolean update functions
Bi, a steady-state of the Boolean model will also be a steady-state of the continuous system. This result can be applied to the BooleCube model as well as the normalized HillCube model, but not to the non-normalized HillCube model. Therefore, Boolean steady-states will in general not be steady-states of the non-normalized HillCube system. The question is if Boolean steady-states still correspond to 'similar' steady-states of this continuous model, at least for certain parameters. Using the implicit function theorem we were able to show that this is indeed the case (see Methods). The reverse statement is, of course, not true, as in the continuous model additional (stable) steady-states may arise. Besides the steady-state behavior, monotony properties are a further important characteristic of a dynamical system. These properties determine the effect of a down- or up-regulation of a certain species on the other species. Due to its accuracy the presented transformation method preserves the monotony properties of a Boolean network. In the Discussion section we illustrate this further using the T-cell model as an example.
We show these results as they justify our transformation approach by demonstrating that it preserves essential properties of the Boolean model. For a deeper mathematical investigation of the relation between discrete and continuous models we refer the interested reader to the rich literature on this subject, e.g. [
11,
16,
17]
Simulation of the Boolean T-cell model
Figure shows a simulation of the Boolean T-cell model using synchronous updates. In the beginning the three inputs were 0 and the system was in its resting state (scenario 1). At t = 10 the inputs were manually switched on and the signaling cascade was triggered off, which at t = 24 led to the activation of all four transcription factors CRE, AP1, NFkB and NFAT (scenario 2). At t = 57 we activated the feedback loops Fyn → PAG-Csk and ZAP-70 → cCbl. Consequently the cascade was blocked and at t = 67 all transcription factors were again deactivated. So, essentially the simulation used three different Boolean models at times [0, 10), [10, 57) and [57, 100]. Note that in the Boolean model the time point for the activation of the feedback loops could be chosen arbitrarily. As is explained below, in the continuous model this time point was determined by our choice of the kinetic parameters. We chose t = 57 since then deactivation of all transcription factors occurred at around the same time point in both models.
After deactivation oscillations occurred, artefacts of the synchronous updating. When the species were updated asynchronously according to some permutation, these oscillations could be observed for 3078 out of 10000 randomly sampled permutations; in the other cases a steady-state was reached.
Continuous T-cell model
We applied the transformation technique to the Boolean T-cell model. Using non-normalized HillCubes we obtained a large quantitative model of T-cell activation (see Methods). In a first step, we manually determined approximate parameters for which the continuous model reproduces the behavior of the Boolean model during all three scenarios. The information about fast and slow interactions was thereby encoded in the values of specific parameters. Consequently, the continuous model was able to explain both, the activation as well as the deactivation of T-cells, without any alteration of the network topology between different scenarios. Note that this was necessary in the Boolean case. We set all Hill coefficients to n = 3, the thresholds to k = 0.3 and the life-times to τ = 1, with the exception of Fyn and ZAP-70. Here we knew that the interactions Fyn → PAG-Csk and ZAP-70 → cCbl operate on a slower time scale. Therefore the thresholds for these interactions were set to kslow = 0.8 whereas the thresholds for the interactions Fyn → TCR-phos, ZAP-70 → LAT-phosp, ZAP-70 → PLCg (act) and ZAP-70 → Itk were set to kfast = 0.1. The Hill functions for the three thresholds k, kslow and kfast are displayed in Figure . Finally, we set the life-times of Fyn and ZAP-70 to τFyn = τZAP-70 = 10 to enlarge the time gap between the two switching points.
The numeric simulation of the continuous T-cell model with the manually determined parameters is shown in Figure . At first, the cell was again in its resting state with all three inputs turned off. Then at t = 10 we manually switched on all inputs and the signaling cascade was triggered off showing an expression profile very similar to the Boolean simulation (Figure ). We observed a total activation of the four transcription factors at around t = 21 just like in the Boolean simulation. One can clearly see that Fyn and ZAP-70 were activated more slowly. Nonetheless TCR-phos, LAT-phosp, PLCg (act) and Itk were instantly turned on due to the low threshold kfast. Only when at around t = 25 the concentrations of Fyn and ZAP-70 were high enough, the feedback loops Fyn → PAG-Csk and ZAP-70 → cCbl became active and began to switch on PAG-Csk and cCbl. While PAG-Csk reached a constant medium expression level, cCbl was only weakly and transiently expressed. This, however, sufficed to switch off the cascade and ultimately at around t = 67 all transcription factors were again deactivated. In contrast to the Boolean model, the continuous model did not exhibit an oscillatory behavior but reached a steady-state after deactivation of the signaling cascade. The species with long expression periods in the Boolean oscillation (Tcr bind, PAG Csk, Fyn, TCR phos and IkB) were expressed at high or medium levels whereas the species with short expression periods were not expressed at all.
Comparison of the discrete and the continuous T-cell model
Although one can argue that there is no real time scale in Boolean networks, we compared both models by substracting the discrete from the continuous time course (Figure ). The activation of the feedback loops in the Boolean model was conveniently chosen such that we have a total deactivation of the transcription factors at around t = 67 in both models. While we observed an almost perfect agreement of the time courses of the three inputs, there was a huge difference in the time courses of the species involved in the two feedback loops. This was not surprising, considering that these loops are regulated differently in both models. The species downstream of the regulatory loops (from LAT phosp to CRE in Figure ) showed again a similar expression pattern.
We then analyzed this part of the cascade more deeply. Figure also shows the correlation between the discrete and the continuous expression pattern of the species downstream of the feedback loops at each time point 0 <t < 100. We observed a high correlation in the more stationary phases (resting state, activated state and deactivated state) and a significant drop of correlation during the transitions between these phases. This met our expectation that the two models show the same qualitative but a different dynamic behavior.
Ratio of activation and deactivation time
When looking at Figures and , a striking difference between the dynamics of both models is that in the discrete model activation and deactivation took approximately the same time, whereas in the continuous model activation was a much faster process than deactivation. This can also be seen from the red and blue 'steps' in upper Figure during the activation and deactivation phases. To confirm that this was not merely an artefact of our choice of parameters, we calculated and analyzed the ratio between activation and deactivation time for different parameters. We defined
• the beginning of activation tActBeg as the time when the first species (of the lower 29) reaches 5% of its maximal value,
• the end of activation tActEnd as the time when the last species reaches 95% of its maximal value,
• the beginning of deactivation tDeactBeg as the time after tActEnd when the first species drops under 95% of its maximal value,
• the end of deactivation tDeactEnd as the time when the last species drops under 5% of its maximal value,
• and, finally, the ratio of interest
In the Boolean model we could easily compute ρb = 1 implying equally fast activation and deactivation. In the continuous model the crucial parameters were the life-times τFyn and τZAP-70 on the one hand and the concentration thresholds kfast and kslow on the other hand. The remaining parameters were set to n = 3, k = 0.3 and τ = 1.
First, we computed ρ for fixed kfast and kslow and different τFyn = τZAP-70. The result is shown in Figure . For τFyn = τZAP-70 = 1 the cascade was not activated properly. For larger values we observed a decrease in ρ implying that an increase of τFyn and τZAP-70 prolonged the deactivation phase. This was to be expected — longer life-times resulted in a lessened increase of the decisive elements Fyn and ZAP-70 in the regulatory loop.
Second, we analyzed the effect of
kfast and
kslow for fixed
τFyn =
τZAP-70 = 10. The result is shown in Figure . Only for parameters
kfast
kslow < 1 the cascade was activated properly. This agrees well with the fact that the difference between these two parameters is responsible for the delayed activation of the feedback loops. If it was not big enough the cascade was being deactivated before it had been fully activated. The greater this difference was, i.e. the farther we go away from the diagonal in Figure , the smaller
ρ got, implying that a later activation of the feedback loops prolonged the deactivation phase. However, despite all these influences of the parameters, we observed much smaller ratios
ρ in the continuous model than in the Boolean model. The average
ρ's in Figures and were

= 0.24 and

= 0.27, respectively, which were both significantly smaller then
ρb = 1. This suggests that
ρ ![[double less-than sign]](/corehtml/pmc/pmcents/x226A.gif)
1 may be an invariant of the dynamical system of biological importance.
Explanation of experimental data using the continuous T-cell model
The crucial question is if our model can reproduce real data. To test this we used the data set presented in [
12] (see Methods). It describes the dynamics of the activation of key signaling elements upon activation of the TCR by three different ligands with varying affinity, Q144, Y144 and L144. We considered, in particular, the ligand L144 for which experiments were performed with three different ligand concentrations. Using global minimization of the model fit with respect to the data, we were able to determine a set of parameters for which our model reasonably reproduced the experimental data (see Methods and Table ). Figures show the corresponding simulated time courses. We see that the model was able to approximate the time courses of ERK and IKK well. The fit of JNK was also acceptable, although the high measured concentrations at time
t = 0 constituted a problem, as the model was naturally unable to reproduce them due to the delaying effect of the signaling cascade. In the case of NFAT, the model was unable to reproduce the non-monotone dependence on the ligand concentration. This suggests that the network structure cannot be reconciled with the non-monotone dependence of the two key signaling molecules JNK and especially NFAT with respect to the ligand concentration. A non-monotone response of T-cell signals has been reported in other contexts [
18], and is consistent with the role of T-cells: their response has to be exquisitely regulated so as to reply only to a particular stimulus; an uncoupled response between the JNK (and p38) and ERK MAP Kinases has also been observed [
19]. The regulation of NFAT and JNK, and more generally of TCR-induced signaling, is complex and not yet fully understood. To mention just two examples, processes such as Ras localization [
20] have been shown to play a key role, but are not included in the model, and the regulation of calcium, which governs NFAT behavior, is more complex than described in the model. It is out of the scope of this paper to investigate this intriguing behavior in detail, but this result illustrates the power of our approach to gain new biological insight: taking exactly the same knowledge encoded in the discrete model and fitting it to quantitative data, we were able to identify the incompleteness of our model in an aspect that we could not have explored with a discrete model.
| Table 1Best fit parameter set for ligand L144. |
Best fit parameter set
Subsequently, we analyzed the distribution of the Hill parameters within the best fit parameter set for ligand L144 (Table ). When looking at the distribution of the exponents n upstream of the measured species (Figure ) we found that after the optimization 36 out of 49 (73%) were below the ad hoc estimate (3) and only 8(16%) were above it. This was to be expected, as in order to fit three different concentration levels the model had to contain mainly slow switches (low n) and only few Boolean-like switches (n → ∞). Figure shows the distribution of the threshold parameters k upstream of the measured species. As explained above, we had manually set these parameters to 0.3, with the exception of four k's which had been set to kslow = 0.8 and two k's which had been set to kfast = 0.1. Interestingly, this structure had been preserved during the optimization. The mean of the thresholds k was 0.298 and hence well agreed with the ad hoc estimate. Also the high and low thresholds were still at least two standard deviations away from the mean, cf. the red and blue markers '+' in Figure . Only one other parameter k also had a Z-score above 2: the threshold kL144 for the stimulation of the TCR by the ligand L144, cf. marker 'o'. Possible implications hereof are discussed below.
Due to the large number of parameters the obtained parameter set was, of course, far from being unique. But we showed that a continuous model inferred from a Boolean model is able to reproduce experimental data in a quantitative way. Moreover, this transformation could enhance the explanatory power of the model in the sense that it was enabled to differentiate between more than two states.
In our example, the threshold parameters k are rather tightly centered around their mean. In principle, however, we could also have extreme outliers, i.e. very large or very small (≈ 0) values in the distribution. Mapped back to the Boolean model, this would imply a change of the network topology, as the corresponding reactions are then quasi-constant, either 'off' (for very large k) or 'on' (for very small k). Thus, a fitting of the continuous model to experimental data may also yield information about the network structure of the Boolean model.
Prediction of binding affinities of different ligands
As already mentioned, the fitted threshold
kL144 for the stimulation of the TCR by the ligand L144 was significantly below the mean of the other thresholds
k, cf. marker 'o' in Figure . This gave rise to the question of which affinities the model predicts for the other two ligands. To this end, we fitted the affinities of Q144 and Y144, mapped to the inverse of the Hill function's threshold parameters
kQ144 and
kY144, respectively, keeping the rest of the parameters constant. As expected, the fits themselves were far from perfect, due to parameter indeterminacies. Surprisingly however, the values of
kQ144 and
kY144 we obtained were significantly above the mean of the other thresholds
k, cf. markers '
![[diamond with plus]](/corehtml/pmc/pmcents/x25C7.gif)
' and '□' in Figure . This suggests that the predicted relation between the parameters
kL144
kY144 <
kQ144 is not simply an artefact of the optimization process. And indeed, it agrees well with experimental data [
21].