Systems biology has experienced dramatic growth in the number, size, and complexity of computational models. To reproduce simulation results and reuse models, researchers must exchange unambiguous model descriptions. We review the latest edition of the Systems Biology Markup Language (SBML), a format designed for this purpose. A community of modelers and software authors developed SBML Level 3 over the past decade. Its modular form consists of a core suited to representing reaction‐based models and packages that extend the core with features suited to other model types including constraint‐based models, reaction‐diffusion models, logical network models, and rule‐based models. The format leverages two decades of SBML and a rich software ecosystem that transformed how systems biologists build and interact with models. More recently, the rise of multiscale models of whole cells and organs, and new data sources such as single‐cell measurements and live imaging, has precipitated new ways of integrating data with models. We provide our perspectives on the challenges presented by these developments and how SBML Level 3 provides the foundation needed to support this evolution.

BackgroundWith the ever increasing use of computational models in the biosciences, the need to share models and reproduce the results of published studies efficiently and easily is becoming more important. To this end, various standards have been proposed that can be used to describe models, simulations, data or other essential information in a consistent fashion. These constitute various separate components required to reproduce a given published scientific result.ResultsWe describe the Open Modeling EXchange format (OMEX). Together with the use of other standard formats from the Computational Modeling in Biology Network (COMBINE), OMEX is the basis of the COMBINE Archive, a single file that supports the exchange of all the information necessary for a modeling and simulation experiment in biology. An OMEX file is a ZIP container that includes a manifest file, listing the content of the archive, an optional metadata file adding information about the archive and its content, and the files describing the model. The content of a COMBINE Archive consists of files encoded in COMBINE standards whenever possible, but may include additional files defined by an Internet Media Type. Several tools that support the COMBINE Archive are available, either as independent libraries or embedded in modeling software.ConclusionsThe COMBINE Archive facilitates the reproduction of modeling and simulation experiments in biology by embedding all the relevant information in one file. Having all the information stored and exchanged at once also helps in building activity logs and audit trails. We anticipate that the COMBINE Archive will become a significant help for modellers, as the domain moves to larger, more complex experiments such as multi-scale models of organs, digital organisms, and bioengineering.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12859-014-0369-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Life science researchers use computational models to articulate and test hypotheses about the behavior of biological systems. Semantic annotation is a critical component for enhancing the interoperability and reusability of such models as well as for the integration of the data needed for model parameterization and validation. Encoded as machine-readable links to knowledge resource terms, semantic annotations describe the computational or biological meaning of what models and data represent. These annotations help researchers find and repurpose models, accelerate model composition and enable knowledge integration across model repositories and experimental data stores. However, realizing the potential benefits of semantic annotation requires the development of model annotation standards that adhere to a community-based annotation protocol. Without such standards, tool developers must account for a variety of annotation formats and approaches, a situation that can become prohibitively cumbersome and which can defeat the purpose of linking model elements to controlled knowledge resource terms. Currently, no consensus protocol for semantic annotation exists among the larger biological modeling community. Here, we report on the landscape of current annotation practices among the COmputational Modeling in BIology NEtwork community and provide a set of recommendations for building a consensus approach to semantic annotation.

Computational modeling of cardiac cellular electrophysiology has a long history, and many models are now available for different species, cell types, and experimental preparations. This success brings with it a challenge: how do we assess and compare the underlying hypotheses and emergent behaviors so that we can choose a model as a suitable basis for a new study or to characterize how a particular model behaves in different scenarios? We have created an online resource for the characterization and comparison of electrophysiological cell models in a wide range of experimental scenarios. The details of the mathematical model (quantitative assumptions and hypotheses formulated as ordinary differential equations) are separated from the experimental protocol being simulated. Each model and protocol is then encoded in computer-readable formats. A simulation tool runs virtual experiments on models encoded in CellML, and a website (https://chaste.cs.ox.ac.uk/WebLab) provides a friendly interface, allowing users to store and compare results. The system currently contains a sample of 36 models and 23 protocols, including current-voltage curve generation, action potential properties under steady pacing at different rates, restitution properties, block of particular channels, and hypo-/hyperkalemia. This resource is publicly available, open source, and free, and we invite the community to use it and become involved in future developments. Investigators interested in comparing competing hypotheses using models can make a more informed decision, and those developing new models can upload them for easy evaluation under the existing protocols, and even add their own protocols.

Objective Whole-cell (WC) modeling is a promising tool for biological research, bioengineering, and medicine. However, substantial work remains to create accurate, comprehensive models of complex cells. Methods We organized the 2015 Whole-Cell Modeling Summer School to teach WC modeling and evaluate the need for new WC modeling standards and software by recoding a recently published WC model in SBML. Results Our analysis revealed several challenges to representing WC models using the current standards. Conclusion We, therefore, propose several new WC modeling standards, software, and databases. Significance We anticipate that these new standards and software will enable more comprehensive models.