We are testing the feasibility of applying a rule-based, logic-driven approach to modeling biology based on state-of-the-art methods and tools from software and system engineering. The model is assembled from short logical statements that each describe a small part of how the system works. These descriptions of the various snippets of biology are termed scenarios. There are two sets of scenario statements in our model. One set describes the rules we have inferred about how the system works; these propel model simulation. Since these are generalized rules of behavior, the model is predictive. The second set of scenario statements describes actual experimental outcomes; these can be used to test whether the rule-based model is consistent with the data upon which it is based. An attractive feature of this approach is that scenario-based models are assembled similarly to the manner in which we build our understanding of biology from sets of experiments that address specific aspects of a biological process. The model can be built, altered, tested, and extended in a modular fashion, recapitulating the iterative processes of hypothesis testing and data analysis. We tested the feasibility of this approach by modeling a subset of the data pertaining to C. elegans vulval precursor cell (VPC) fate specification. The model covers a wide range of behaviors - anatomical, cellular and genetic. We present a rigorously tested dynamic model that is both usable and extendable. Simulations can be run and analyzed dynamically in detail under varying conditions. We first tested the model by seeing if it could reproduce all of the data of the
pre-1990 data set from which many of the underlying rules were inferred. Our modeling methodology is also useful for testing competing hypotheses. Multiple hypotheses can be represented and stored within the same model by introducing the subset of variant rules that distinguish them. The variant models can then be tested for their consistency with the known set of pertinent data to help understand their differences. We applied this feature to probe the sequential versus graded signaling hypotheses given our
pre-1990 data set. Systematic testing then identified the actual experimental results that were not consistent with each hypothesis. The construction and testing of our dynamic model raised important testable hypotheses. Our work demonstrates that the traditional hypothesis-experiment cycle can be supplemented by the construction and use of executable dynamic models, creating a more powerful cycle of hypothesis-modeling-testing-experiment.