How to stop worrying about model microfoundationality: lessons from multiscale cancer modeling

Abstract Microfoundational or bottom-up models are models that aim to reproduce the high-level behavior of a system by modeling only interactions between lower-level entities. One argument for privileging microfoundational models in biology rests on the belief that they have unique virtues (e.g. explanatory value, modularity, etc.) that make them superior to non-microfoundational models. This paper challenges this reductionist ideal. By analyzing multiscale cancer models, I show that the five virtues identified by Epstein and Forber (Synthese 190:203-218, 2013) are not exclusive to microfoundational models. My analysis of middle-out, multiscale models of tumor progression shows that they too embody these virtues. Because they incorporate both higher- and lower-level processes, I contend that non-microfoundational models are often more virtuous and therefore better suited to modeling complex biological phenomena. Ultimately, my analysis suggests that we have no good a priori reasons to privilege microfoundational models in biology and instead ought to be pluralists with respect to biological modeling.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Synthese
Published
2025-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-025-05344-5
Primary Topic
Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How to stop worrying about model microfoundationality: lessons from multiscale cancer modeling

Jacob P. Neal
Synthese
Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
article

How to stop worrying about model microfoundationality: lessons from multiscale cancer modeling

Jacob P. Neal
article en

Abstract

Abstract Microfoundational or bottom-up models are models that aim to reproduce the high-level behavior of a system by modeling only interactions between lower-level entities. One argument for privileging microfoundational models in biology rests on the belief that they have unique virtues (e.g. explanatory value, modularity, etc.) that make them superior to non-microfoundational models. This paper challenges this reductionist ideal. By analyzing multiscale cancer models, I show that the five virtues identified by Epstein and Forber (Synthese 190:203-218, 2013) are not exclusive to microfoundational models. My analysis of middle-out, multiscale models of tumor progression shows that they too embody these virtues. Because they incorporate both higher- and lower-level processes, I contend that non-microfoundational models are often more virtuous and therefore better suited to modeling complex biological phenomena. Ultimately, my analysis suggests that we have no good a priori reasons to privilege microfoundational models in biology and instead ought to be pluralists with respect to biological modeling.

SyntheseVol. 206(5)
University of Oregon (US)
Université de Bordeaux
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Mathematical Biology Tumor Growth
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.