scispace - formally typeset
M

Matthew Patrick

Researcher at University of Michigan

Publications -  68
Citations -  1307

Matthew Patrick is an academic researcher from University of Michigan. The author has contributed to research in topics: Biology & Medicine. The author has an hindex of 14, co-authored 47 publications receiving 661 citations. Previous affiliations of Matthew Patrick include University of Cambridge & University of York.

Papers
More filters
Proceedings ArticleDOI

Testing stochastic software using pseudo-oracles

TL;DR: A new search-based technique for testing implementations of stochastic models by maximising the differences between the implementation and a pseudo-oracle is introduced, which reduces testing effort and enables discrepancies to be found that might otherwise be overlooked.
Journal ArticleDOI

Advancement in predicting interactions between drugs used to treat psoriasis and its comorbidities by integrating molecular and clinical resources

TL;DR: A new computational approach is introduced to comprehensively assess the drug pairs which may be involved in specific DDI types by combining information from large-scale gene expression, transcriptomic datasets, molecular structure, and medical claims, to accurately predict potential new DDIs that can have an impact on public health.
Journal ArticleDOI

Skin-Expressing lncRNAs in Inflammatory Responses

TL;DR: In vitro and in vivo experimental data demonstrate how some of these lncRNAs can play mediator roles in the cytokine-stimulated pathway, including basal-expressing nature of H19 in the epidermis.
Proceedings ArticleDOI

Online evolution in Unreal Tournament 2004

TL;DR: This paper aims to show adaptation using online evolution is feasible and that it can can be incorporated with minimal change to the existing AI.
Proceedings ArticleDOI

A Toolkit for Testing Stochastic Simulations against Statistical Oracles

TL;DR: This paper introduces a new approach towards testing stochastic simulations using statistical oracles and transition probabilities, and found it can detect errors at least three times smaller (and in one case, over 1000 times smaller) than a conventional approach.