The general questions concerning the shoebox simulations of transcription cluster visits:
how did it all started? What was the driving force to start the research on gene-cluster visits?
which experimental observations led to the conclusions that a computational model is necessary?
what was the original purpose of creating a computational model of transcription cluster visits? i.e. which of the phenomena of interest couldn't be answered by experiment, but which were expected to be approached in simulations?
what was the original hypothesis (if there was any)? Was it confirmed or abolished as the time passed?
the existence of computational simulations can be justified if they are somehow complementary to the experimental data, or if they convey some message themselves - but not if their only purpose is to reproduce the experiment. In the latter case, we would have a redundant set of data, which is absolutely not necessary. So, what was the complementary or standalone message that those simulations can convey?
how did the research unfold? I assume that it started with a certain question/hypothesis, which were adjusted according to the newest findings. It would be important to have insight into this "adjustment" process which led to the point where we are now.
The general questions concerning the shoebox simulations of transcription cluster visits:
how did it all started? What was the driving force to start the research on gene-cluster visits?
which experimental observations led to the conclusions that a computational model is necessary?
what was the original purpose of creating a computational model of transcription cluster visits? i.e. which of the phenomena of interest couldn't be answered by experiment, but which were expected to be approached in simulations?
what was the original hypothesis (if there was any)? Was it confirmed or abolished as the time passed?
the existence of computational simulations can be justified if they are somehow complementary to the experimental data, or if they convey some message themselves - but not if their only purpose is to reproduce the experiment. In the latter case, we would have a redundant set of data, which is absolutely not necessary. So, what was the complementary or standalone message that those simulations can convey?
how did the research unfold? I assume that it started with a certain question/hypothesis, which were adjusted according to the newest findings. It would be important to have insight into this "adjustment" process which led to the point where we are now.