Science Advances

Supplementary Materials

This PDF file includes:

  • table S1. Summary statistics for the SR and cAF data sets are well recovered by the calibrated POMs.
  • table S2. SMC with subsequent refinement produces POMs with very low divergence from the distributions in the data.
  • fig. S1. Calibration to biomarker distributions, as opposed to their ranges, significantly reduces model bias for the cAF data set.
  • fig. S2. Variability in the cAF data set is captured by a population of CRN models with varying current densities.
  • fig. S3. Further variance in INa improves the realization of dV/dtmax values in the SR data set.
  • fig. S4. Calibration to ranges fails to capture the morphological differences between SR and cAF atrial APs.
  • fig. S5. Calibrating to data ranges does not identify all changes in ionic behavior associated with the cAF pathology.
  • fig. S6. The distributions of parameter values selected for the SR and cAF POMs are distinct but regular.
  • fig. S7. Variation of ±30% in current densities underestimates biomarker variance in the cAF data set.

Download PDF

Files in this Data Supplement: