Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: continuous state differential equations are a popular modeling choice for the chemical concentrations of biochemical reaction networks in several disciplines , including industrial chemistry and systems biology . however , differential equations should only be used to model chemical concentrations when the counts of the reactant species are high @xcite . when the multiplicity of the individual species is low , as is often the case in enzymatic and genetic systems , it is important to use a model with a discrete state space which tracks individual molecular counts . predictions pertaining to the long - term behavior of a particular system can change dramatically depending upon whether the system is modeled with differential equations or with a discrete state space . in particular , discrete - space models may exhibit an extinction event where none exists in the corresponding continuous state model . for example , consider the following chemical reaction network :    ( c1 ) @xmath0 ; ( c2 ) @xmath1 ; ( c3 ) @xmath2 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c3 ) ;    where the labels correspond to the enumeration of the reactions . the deterministic mass action model predicts an asymptotically stable steady state for a wide range of parameter values . however , for the discrete - space model with stochastic mass - action kinetics and @xmath6 , the state @xmath7 is the inevitable absorbing state regardless of parameter values . this extinction event can be achieved by reaction 3 occurring until the count of species @xmath8 is zero , at which point no further reactions may occur . several frameworks exist for tracking trajectories of discrete state chemical reaction systems , including those of continuous time markov chains @xcite and stochastic petri nets @xcite . in these settings , the admissible transitions between states are assumed to occur randomly at a known rate and the occurrence of each reaction instantaneously updates the system according to the stoichiometry of the associated reaction . analysis of such systems is typically conducted by generating sample trajectories ( through a stochastic simulation algorithm , e.g. _ gillespie s algorithm _ @xcite or the next reaction method @xcite ) , by analyzing the evolution of the probability distribution via kolmogorov s forward equations ( i.e.  the _ chemical master equation _ ) , by characterizing the stationary distributions of the models @xcite , or by studying the stochastic equations for the model @xcite . the study of extinction events in discrete interaction models is well - established in population dynamics and epidemic modeling , but the corresponding study in systems biology has only recently gained widespread attention . in @xcite anderson _ et al . _  described a large class of systems for which an extinction event necessarily occurs in the discrete model . interestingly , this class of models had previously been shown to have a particular `` robustness '' when modeled with deterministic ordinary differential equations @xcite . in @xcite r. brijder utilized tools from petri net theory to further extend the scope of networks known to have extinction behavior , by relating a kernel condition introduced in @xcite to the @xmath9-invariants of the corresponding petri net . related recent work analyzing transient and post - extinction behavior in discrete chemical reaction systems can be found in @xcite . in this paper , we further develop a network - based approach to determining when discrete - space chemical reaction systems may exhibit an extinction event . our main results , theorem [ mainresult ] and corollary [ maincorollary ] , state that a chemical reaction network with a discrete state space exhibits an extinction event if there is a modified network , called the domination - expanded reaction network , on which a particular set of inequalities on the edges _ can not _ be satisfied . the conditions we present may be summarized as systems of equalities and inequalities and , like corollary 2 of @xcite , suggests computational implementation . such an implementation will be explored in further depth in a follow - up paper @xcite . we demonstrate the effectiveness of corollary [ maincorollary ] on several models , including a model of the envz - ompr signaling pathway in _ escherichia coli _ @xcite .    the notation of the paper is drawn from _ chemical reaction network theory _ which has proven effective for relating topological properties of a network s reaction graph to its admissible qualitative dynamical behaviors @xcite . the notions introduced here may be equivalently defined in the context of petri nets , which we summarize in appendix [ appendixd ] @xcite . we also adopt the following common notation throughout the paper :    * @xmath10 and @xmath11 , * for @xmath12 , we define @xmath13 , * for a set @xmath14 of indexed elements and a subset @xmath15 , we define @xmath16 , * for a subset @xmath15 , we define the complement @xmath17 , * for @xmath18 , we define @xmath19 if @xmath20 for each @xmath21 . we outline the background notation and terminology relevant to the study of _ chemical reaction network theory _ ( crnt ) . ( for further background , see martin feinberg s online lecture notes @xcite . ) the fundamental object of interest in crnt is the following . [ crn ] a * chemical reaction network * ( crn ) is given by a triple of finite sets @xmath22 where :    1 . the * species set * @xmath23 contains the species of the crn . 2 .   the * reaction set * @xmath24 consists of ordered pairs @xmath25 where @xmath26 and where the values @xmath27 are the * stoichiometric coefficients*. we will also write reactions @xmath28 as @xmath29 . the * complex set * @xmath30 consists of the linear combinations of the species in . specifically , @xmath31 . the number of distinct complexes is denoted @xmath32 . + allowing for a slight abuse of notation , we will let @xmath33 denote both the complex itself and the complex vector @xmath34 . we assume an arbitrary but fixed ordering of the species , reactions and complexes . it is common to impose that a crn does not contain any self - loops ( i.e.  reactions of the form @xmath35 ) . since this assumption is not used in our results , and since it is common to allow self - loops in petri net theory , we will not make this assumption here .    the interpretation of reactions as directed edges naturally gives rise to a reaction graph @xmath36 where the set of vertices is given by the complexes ( i.e.  @xmath37 ) and the set of edges is given by the reactions ( i.e.  @xmath38 . the following terminology will be used . a.   a complex @xmath33 is _ connected _ to a complex @xmath39 if there exists a sequence of complexes @xmath40 such that either @xmath41 or @xmath42 for all @xmath43 . b.   there is a _ path _ from @xmath33 to @xmath39 if there is a sequence of distinct complexes such that @xmath44 . c.   a maximal set of mutually connected complexes is called a _ linkage class _ ( lc ) while a maximal set of mutually path - connected complexes is called a _ strong linkage class _ ( slc ) . the set of linkage classes will be denoted @xmath45 while the set of slcs will be denoted @xmath46 . d.   an slc @xmath47 is called _ terminal _ if there are no outgoing reactions , i.e.  @xmath48 and @xmath49 implies @xmath50 . the set of terminal slcs will be denoted @xmath51 . a complex @xmath52 is called terminal if it belongs to a terminal slc , and a reaction @xmath53 is terminal if @xmath33 is terminal . e.   a set @xmath54 is called an _ absorbing complex set _ if it contains every terminal complex and has no outgoing edges , i.e. @xmath55 and @xmath53 implies @xmath56 . a complex @xmath55 is called @xmath57-interior , and a reaction @xmath53 is called @xmath57-interior if @xmath33 is @xmath57-interior ; otherwise they are @xmath57-exterior .    absorbing complex sets are a generalization of the set of terminal complexes of a crn , since they must contain , but may be strictly larger than , this set . note that the set of terminal complexes is a closed complex set of the crn , as is the set @xmath58 . we will be particularly interested in the case where @xmath57 is the set of terminal complexes , as this provides the foundation upon which our main results are built . to each reaction @xmath53 we associate a _ reaction vector _ @xmath59 which tracks the net gain and loss of each chemical species as a result of the occurrence of this reaction . the _ stoichiometric subspace _ is defined by @xmath60 the _ stoichiometric matrix _ @xmath61 is the matrix with the reaction vectors as columns . a crn is said to be _ conservative _ ( respectively , _ subconservative _ ) if there exists a @xmath62 such that @xmath63 ( respectively , @xmath64 ) . the vector @xmath65 is called a _ conservation vector_. conservative crns have the property that a particular linear combination of all species remains constant as a result of each reaction , while subconservative crns have a combination of species which is nonincreasing in every reaction . a common example is conservation in the overall amount of enzyme or substrates in a closed enzymatic system , but there need not be such a physical interpretation . we present three examples in order to illustrate definitions . [ example234 ] consider the following crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath1 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( ghost ) @xmath66 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath8 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c4 ) ;    this crn has the sets @xmath68 , @xmath69 , and @xmath70 . the linkage classes are @xmath71 while the slcs are @xmath72 note that slcs may consist of singletons . the terminal slcs are @xmath73 the stoichiometric matrix is as follows : @xmath74.\ ] ] the stoichiometric subspace is given by @xmath75 , and there is the conservation vector @xmath76 . this conservation vector represents the fact that @xmath77 is constant . [ example235 ] consider the following crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath0 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ;    the set of terminal complexes is @xmath78 . there are several additional choices for absorbing complex sets , including @xmath79 and @xmath80 . the stoichiometric matrix is as follows : @xmath81.\ ] ] the stoichiometric subspace is given by @xmath82 . there is no vector @xmath83 for which @xmath84 , so the crn is not conservative or subconservative . [ example236 ] consider the following crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath1 ; ( c2 ) @xmath8 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c3 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c2 ) ;    the stoichiometric matrix is as follows : @xmath85.\ ] ] there is no vector @xmath83 such that @xmath63 , so the crn is not conservative ; however , the vector @xmath76 has the property that @xmath86 so that the crn is subconservative .      a discrete _ state _ @xmath87 is an element of @xmath88 and denotes the molecular counts of each species . we let @xmath89 denote the state where @xmath90 corresponds to the count of species @xmath91 at time @xmath92 . these discrete states evolve as follows : @xmath93 where @xmath94 and , for all @xmath95 , @xmath96 is the number of times the @xmath97th reaction has occurred up to time @xmath92 . there are several established frameworks for modeling the time - evolution of crns on discrete state spaces , including that of continuous time markov chains ( ctmcs ) and stochastic petri nets . we will not concern ourselves with precise dynamical details ; rather , we will focus on where trajectories may evolve in @xmath88 . for a similar treatment , see the paper of l. paulev _ _ @xcite . we will say that a complex @xmath98 is _ charged _ at state @xmath99 if @xmath100 for all @xmath101 . we will then say that reaction @xmath53 is _ charged _ at state @xmath99 if the `` source complex '' @xmath33 is charged at @xmath87 . note that a reaction is therefore charged at a state @xmath87 if the species counts are sufficient for the source complex of that reaction . we will be primarily interested in how trajectories @xmath102 move through the state space @xmath88 of subconservative crns . in particular , we will be interested in the long - term behavior . we therefore introduce the following terminology , which is adapted from the conventions of stochastic processes . [ recurrence ] consider a crn on a discrete state space . then a state @xmath103 * reacts to * a state @xmath104 ( denoted @xmath105 ) if there is a reaction @xmath53 such that @xmath106 and @xmath33 is charged at state @xmath87 . a state @xmath104 is * reachable * from a state @xmath103 ( denoted @xmath107 if there exists a sequence of states such that @xmath108 . a state @xmath103 is * recurrent * if , for any @xmath104 , @xmath109 implies @xmath110 ; otherwise , the state is * transient*.    note that the state space of a subconservative crn is finite ( see theorem 1 , @xcite ) . for this classification of crns , therefore , the notion of recurrence introduced above therefore agrees with the notion of positive recurrence from the language of ctmc ( see @xcite ) . we now extend the properties of recurrence and transience of states to the complexes and reactions of a crn . further considerations on the recurrence properties of the slcs of a crn are contained in appendix [ appendixc ] . [ turnedon ] consider a crn on a discrete state space . then a complex @xmath52 is * recurrent * from state @xmath103 if @xmath109 implies that there is a @xmath111 for which @xmath112 and @xmath33 is charged at @xmath111 ; otherwise , @xmath33 is * transient * from @xmath87 . a reaction @xmath53 is * recurrent * from state @xmath103 if the source complex @xmath33 is recurrent from @xmath87 ; otherwise , @xmath53 is * transient * from @xmath87 .    in plain english , a complex @xmath33 is recurrent from a state @xmath87 if , whenever the process can go from the state @xmath87 to the state @xmath113 , then the process can move from the state @xmath113 to some state @xmath111 where @xmath33 is charged . the following clarifies the type of behavior for crns on discrete state spaces in which we will be interested . consider a crn on a discrete state space . we will say that the crn exhibits :    1 . an * extinction event on @xmath54 from @xmath114 * if every complex @xmath55 is transient from @xmath87 . 2 .   a * guaranteed extinction event on @xmath54 * if it has an extinction event on @xmath57 from every @xmath114 . consider the crn in example [ example234 ] . through repeated application of reaction @xmath5 , we can arrive at the state @xmath115 where @xmath116 . since this is a possible outcome from any initial @xmath117 , we have that this crn has a guaranteed extinction event on @xmath118 . notice that no reaction may occur after the extinction event . consider the crn in example [ example236 ] . notice that the reaction @xmath119 can not occur indefinitely since all other reactions in the crn preserve @xmath120 . it follows that the model has a guaranteed extinction event on @xmath121 . notice , however , that so long as @xmath122 the reactions @xmath123 and @xmath124 are both recurrent . an extinction event therefore does not necessarily imply that all reactions must cease . in this section , we motivate and present the main new constructions and theory of the paper ( theorem [ mainresult ] and corollary [ maincorollary ] ) . we introduce the following .    [ complexdomination ] let @xmath125 denote two distinct complexes of a crn . we say that @xmath33 * dominates * @xmath39 if @xmath126 . we define the * domination set * of a crn to be @xmath127    the notion of complex domination was introduced by d. anderson _ et al . _  in @xcite as an adaptation of the notion of `` differing in one species '' introduced by g. shinar and m. feinberg in @xcite . the domination property was extended to slcs by r. brijder in @xcite where it was also shown that , for conservative crns , the domination properties give rise to a binary relation on the slcs of a crn whose transitive closure is a partial ordering on the slcs of the crn ( lemma 2 , @xcite ) . we consider further properties of transience and recurrence of slcs in appendix [ appendixc ] . we note that the definition of complex domination in definition [ complexdomination ] is consistent with @xcite but reversed from @xcite . [ example919 ] consider the crns from examples [ example234 ] , [ example235 ] , and [ example236 ] respectively . for the crn in example [ example234 ] , we set @xmath128 , @xmath129 , @xmath130 , and @xmath131 and have @xmath132 , @xmath133 , and @xmath134 . for the crn in example [ example235 ] , we set @xmath135 , @xmath129 , @xmath130 , and @xmath136 , and have @xmath137 and @xmath133 . for the crn in example [ example236 ] , we set @xmath128 , @xmath138 , and @xmath130 , and have @xmath139 and @xmath132 . the key construction of this paper is the following , which uses the domination relations @xmath140 to expand crns into larger crns we call _ domination - expanded reaction networks_.    [ dominationnetwork ] we say that @xmath141 is a * domination - expanded reaction network * ( dom - crn ) of the crn @xmath22 if @xmath142 . furthermore , we say a dom - crn is * @xmath57-admissible * if , given an absorbing complex set @xmath54 of the dom - crn , we have : ( i ) @xmath143 , and ( ii ) @xmath144 implies @xmath145 . a dom - crn consists of the original crn with additional directed edges corresponding to some ( potentially all ) of the domination relations @xmath126 . note that the reaction arrows flow from the dominating complex to the `` smaller '' complex in the domination relation , i.e. @xmath126 implies we add @xmath29 . consequently , like reactions , we will denote domination relations as either @xmath28 or @xmath29 . a dom - crn is admissible if we do not add any reactions which lead to the absorbing complex set @xmath57 of the dom - crn . when applying definition [ dominationnetwork ] , we will commonly let the absorbing complex set @xmath57 coincide with the set of terminal complexes of the dom - crn . in such cases , we will say a dom - crn is simply _ admissible _ with the understanding that @xmath57 is the set of terminal complexes . note that a dom - crn is a crn in itself and therefore has associated to it all of the quantities and structural matrices given section [ crntsection ] . while a dom - crn in general may have different structural properties than the original crn , an important restriction is given by the following result , which is based on lemma 2 of @xcite . the proof is contained in appendix [ appendixa ] . [ terminallemma ] if a crn is subconservative , then for any dom - crn : ( i ) the slcs of the crn and the dom - crn coincide , and ( ii ) every terminal slc of the dom - crn is a terminal slc of the crn . we can interpret lemma [ terminallemma ] as saying that , for a subconservative crn , the addition of domination edges does not create new cycles between slcs since this would create new slcs . [ example920 ] consider the crn from examples [ example234 ] and [ example919 ] . recall that the crn is conservative , and therefore subconservative , so that lemma [ terminallemma ] applies . the maximal dom - crn is given by the following :    ( c1 ) @xmath1 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath8 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c4 ) ; ( c1 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath146 ( c3 ) ; ( c1 ) edge [ left ] node @xmath147 ( c4 ) ; ( c2 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath148 ( c3 ) ;    where we have indexed the domination relations for clarity . as guaranteed by lemma [ terminallemma ] , the slcs of the crn and dom - crn coincide . notice that the terminal complex @xmath8 in the dom - crn above is terminal in the original crn , but that the terminal complexes @xmath77 and @xmath2 in the crn are not terminal in the dom - crn . notice also that this dom - crn is not admissible since the domination relations @xmath149 leads to the terminal complex @xmath8 . consider instead the subset @xmath150 which corresponds to the following dom - crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath1 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath8 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c4 ) ; ( c1 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath146 ( c3 ) ; ( c2 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath147 ( c3 ) ;    this dom - crn is admissible since @xmath151 contains no domination edges which lead to the terminal complex @xmath8 . consider the crn from example [ example235 ] and [ example919 ] . recall that the crn is neither conservative nor subconservative . thus , lemma [ terminallemma ] stands silent . the maximal dom - crn is given by the following :    ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath0 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ; ( c2 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath152 ( c3 ) ; ( c4 ) edge [ left ] node @xmath152 ( c1 ) ;    we have that there is only one slc in the dom - crn , which is given by @xmath153 , so that the slcs of the crn and dom - crn do not coincide . we can see , therefore , that lemma [ terminallemma ] does not hold in general if we remove the subconservative assumption . the following concept is adapted from numerous sources in graph theory . trees have been used extensively in crnt @xcite and the related notion of arborescences factored in @xcite . [ forest1 ] consider a crn @xmath22 and a @xmath57-admissible dom - crn @xmath141 where @xmath54 is an absorbing complex set on the dom - crn . then @xmath154 where @xmath155 and @xmath156 is called an * @xmath57-exterior forest * if , for every complex @xmath157 , there is a unique path in @xmath158 from @xmath33 to @xmath57 . a @xmath57-exterior forest is a forest in the usual sense in graph theory after restricting to the @xmath57-exterior portion of the reaction graph of the dom - crn . note that definition [ forest1 ] places no restrictions on @xmath57-interior reactions . by convention , we will include such reactions in every @xmath57-exterior forest . if @xmath57 consists solely of the terminal complexes of the dom - crn , we say @xmath154 is simply an _ exterior forest_. we will be interested in particular in @xmath57-exterior forests which satisfy the following property . [ balancing ] consider a crn @xmath22 and a @xmath57-admissible dom - crn @xmath141 where @xmath54 is an absorbing complex set on the dom - crn . let @xmath159 . then a @xmath57-exterior forest @xmath154 is said to be * balanced * if there is a vector @xmath160 with @xmath161 for at least one @xmath57-exterior reaction which satisfies :    1 . supp@xmath162 supp@xmath163 and supp@xmath164 supp@xmath165 ; 2 . @xmath166 ; and 3 .   for every @xmath167 where @xmath157 , we have @xmath168 where @xmath169 . otherwise , the @xmath57-exterior forest is said to be * unbalanced*.    the third condition of definition [ balancing ] can be interpreted as saying that , for every @xmath157 , the weight of the outgoing edge in the @xmath57-exterior forest must be at least as large as the sum of all incoming edges . when taken together , the three conditions of definition [ balancing ] generate a set of equalities and inequalities on the edges of the dom - crn . this suggests a computational implementation , which is investigated in the companion paper @xcite . [ example921 ] recall the crn taken from examples [ example234 ] , [ example919 ] , and [ example920 ] and the admissible dom - crn from example [ example920 ] . this dom - crn admits several exterior forests , for example the following substructures in bold red :    ( c11 ) @xmath1 ; ( c21 ) @xmath2 ; ( c31 ) @xmath67 ; ( c41 ) @xmath8 ; ( c12 ) @xmath1 ; ( c22 ) @xmath2 ; ( c32 ) @xmath67 ; ( c42 ) @xmath8 ; ( c11 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath170 ( c21 ) ; ( c21 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c11 ) ; ( c31 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath171 ( c41 ) ; ( c11 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath146 ( c31 ) ; ( c21 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath172 ( c31 ) ; ( c12 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c22 ) ; ( c22 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath173 ( c12 ) ; ( c32 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath171 ( c42 ) ; ( c12 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath174 ( c32 ) ; ( c22 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath147 ( c32 ) ;    note that every nonterminal complex has a unique path to @xmath8 . we now check whether these exterior forests are balanced by definition [ balancing ] by checking equalities and inequalities on the vector of edges of the following form : @xmath175 note also that the stoichiometric matrix is given by @xmath176.\ ] ]    1 .   in order for the left exterior forest to be balanced , it is required that we find a vector @xmath177 , @xmath178 , satisfying : @xmath179 we can choose @xmath180 so that this is balanced exterior forest . in order for the right exterior forest to be balanced , it is required that we find a nontrivial vector @xmath177 , @xmath178 , satisfying : @xmath181 substituting condition 1 into condition 2 gives @xmath182 which is inconsistent with the requirement from condition 3 that @xmath183 and at least one entry be nonzero . it follows that this is an unbalanced exterior forest . we now present the main results of this paper , which are inspired by theorem 1 and corollary 2 of @xcite . the proof of theorem [ mainresult ] is contained in appendix [ appendixb ] . [ mainresult ] consider a subconservative crn and a @xmath57-admissible dom - crn where @xmath54 is an absorbing complex set on the dom - crn . suppose that there is a complex @xmath157 of the dom - crn which is recurrent from a state @xmath184 in the discrete state space crn . then every @xmath57-exterior forest of the dom - crn is balanced . this result places restrictions on the structure of a subconservative crn that does not experience a guaranteed extinction event . we will be more frequently interested in when discrete extinction occurs , and therefore present the following corollary which follows immediately as the contrapositive of theorem [ mainresult ] . [ maincorollary ] consider a subconservative crn and a @xmath57-admissible dom - crn where @xmath54 is an absorbing complex set on the dom - crn . suppose there is a @xmath57-exterior forest of the dom - crn which is unbalanced . then the discrete state space crn has a guaranteed extinction event on @xmath185 . recall that an exterior forest is unbalanced if there is a set of equalities and inequalities on the edges of the dom - crn which can not be satisfied . the question of determining sufficient conditions for discrete extinction is therefore reduced to determining the feasibility of particular sets of equalities and inequalities . notice also that , even if a crn permits many @xmath57-exterior forests , it is sufficient for a single one to be unbalanced for an extinction event to follow . furthermore , the set of transient complexes corresponds to the set of complexes not in @xmath57 . note that this may contain terminal complexes in the original crn ( see example [ example920 ] ) .    by convention , when applying corollary [ maincorollary ] , if no mention of an absorbing complex set @xmath54 is made , it is assumed to be the set of terminal complexes in the dom - crn . reconsider the crn analyzed in example [ example234 ] , [ example919 ] , and [ example920 ] . this crn is conservative , and in example [ example921 ] we showed that there is an admissible dom - crn with an unbalanced exterior forest . it follows from corollary [ maincorollary ] that the discrete state space crn has a guaranteed extinction event on the set of nonterminal complexes of the dom - crn . that is , from all states @xmath103 , there is guaranteed to be a time after which the count of the species is insufficient for any reaction from the complexes @xmath77 , @xmath2 , and @xmath67 to occur . this is consistent with our earlier observation that the state @xmath115 where @xmath116 absorbs all trajectories through repeated application of the reactions @xmath186 and @xmath124 . notice that this pathway consists of the true reactions in the unbalanced exterior forest .      in this section , we consider a crn which was proposed as underlying the envz / ompr signaling pathway in _ escherichia coli _ in @xcite . this crn has been studied previously with a discrete state space in the papers @xcite where it was shown to exhibit a guarantee extinction event . we reconsider the crn here to demonstrate the process of applying corollary [ maincorollary ] and also to demonstrate the advantages of our approach . in particular , the graphical method of constructing @xmath57-exterior forests suggests the pathways to extinction in the crn . [ example1 ] consider the following reaction mechanism , which was proposed by g. shinar and m. feinberg as underlying the envz / ompr signaling pathway in _ escherichia coli _ in the supplemental material of @xcite :    ( x1 ) @xmath8 ; ( x2 ) @xmath67 ; ( x3 ) @xmath187 ; ( x4 ) @xmath188 ; ( x4x5 ) @xmath189 ; ( x6 ) @xmath190 ; ( x2x7 ) @xmath191 ; ( x3x7 ) @xmath192 ; ( x8 ) @xmath193 ; ( x3x5 ) @xmath194 ; ( x1x7 ) @xmath195 ; ( x9 ) @xmath196 ; ( x1x5 ) @xmath197 ; ( x1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( x2 ) ; ( x2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( x1 ) ; ( x2 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( x3 ) ; ( x3 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( x2 ) ; ( x3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath199 ( x4 ) ; ( x4x5 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath200 ( x6 ) ; ( x6 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath201 ( x4x5 ) ; ( x6 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath202 ( x2x7 ) ; ( x3x7 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath203 ( x8 ) ; ( x8 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath204 ( x3x7 ) ; ( x8 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath205 ( x3x5 ) ; ( x1x7 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath206 ( x9 ) ; ( x9 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath207 ( x1x7 ) ; ( x9 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath208 ( x1x5 ) ;    where @xmath209 , @xmath210 , @xmath211 , @xmath212 , @xmath213 , @xmath214 , @xmath215 , @xmath216 , @xmath217 . consider the admissible dom - crn with @xmath218 . the dom - crn may be graphically represented as :    ( x1x7 ) @xmath195 ; ( x9 ) @xmath196 ; ( x1x5 ) @xmath197 ; ( x1 ) @xmath8 ; ( x2 ) @xmath67 ; ( x3 ) @xmath187 ; ( x4 ) @xmath188 ; ( x3x7 ) @xmath192 ; ( x8 ) @xmath193 ; ( x3x5 ) @xmath194 ; ( x4x5 ) @xmath189 ; ( x6 ) @xmath190 ; ( x2x7 ) @xmath191 ; ( x1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( x2 ) ; ( x2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( x1 ) ; ( x2 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( x3 ) ; ( x3 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( x2 ) ; ( x3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath199 ( x4 ) ; ( x4x5 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath200 ( x6 ) ; ( x6 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath201 ( x4x5 ) ; ( x6 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath202 ( x2x7 ) ; ( x3x7 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath203 ( x8 ) ; ( x8 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath204 ( x3x7 ) ; ( x8 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath205 ( x3x5 ) ; ( x1x7 ) edge node [ right = -0.1 cm ] @xmath206 ( x9 ) ; ( x9 ) edge node [ left = -0.1 cm ] @xmath207 ( x1x7 ) ; ( x9 ) edge node [ right = -0.1 cm ] @xmath208 ( x1x5 ) ; ( x1x7 ) edge [ above right = -0.15 cm ] node @xmath147 ( x1 ) ; ( x1x5 ) edge [ below right = -0.15 cm ] node @xmath146 ( x1 ) ; ( x3x7 ) edge [ left ] node @xmath219 ( x3 ) ; ( x3x5 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath220 ( x3 ) ; ( x2x7 ) edge [ right = -0.15 cm ] node @xmath148 ( x2 ) ;    consider furthermore the following exterior forest :    ( x1x7 ) @xmath195 ; ( x9 ) @xmath196 ; ( x1x5 ) @xmath197 ; ( x1 ) @xmath8 ; ( x2 ) @xmath67 ; ( x3 ) @xmath187 ; ( x4 ) @xmath188 ; ( x3x7 ) @xmath192 ; ( x8 ) @xmath193 ; ( x3x5 ) @xmath194 ; ( x4x5 ) @xmath189 ; ( x6 ) @xmath190 ; ( x2x7 ) @xmath191 ; ( x1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath170 ( x2 ) ; ( x2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( x1 ) ; ( x2 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath171 ( x3 ) ; ( x3 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( x2 ) ; ( x3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath221 ( x4 ) ; ( x4x5 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath222 ( x6 ) ; ( x6 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath201 ( x4x5 ) ; ( x6 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath223 ( x2x7 ) ; ( x3x7 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath203 ( x8 ) ; ( x8 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath224 ( x3x7 ) ; ( x8 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath205 ( x3x5 ) ; ( x1x7 ) edge node [ right = -0.1 cm ] @xmath206 ( x9 ) ; ( x9 ) edge node [ left = -0.1 cm ] @xmath225 ( x1x7 ) ; ( x9 ) edge node [ right = -0.1 cm ] @xmath208 ( x1x5 ) ; ( x1x7 ) edge [ above right ] node @xmath172 ( x1 ) ; ( x1x5 ) edge [ below right ] node @xmath226 ( x1 ) ; ( x3x7 ) edge [ left ] node @xmath227 ( x3 ) ; ( x3x5 ) edge [ right ] node @xmath228 ( x3 ) ; ( x2x7 ) edge [ right = -0.15 cm ] node @xmath229 ( x2 ) ;    in the highlighted structure ( bold red ) , there is a unique path from every complex to the terminal complex @xmath188 . it can be seen directly that this exterior forest is unbalanced by noting that we need a vector @xmath230 , @xmath178 , which has support on a subset of the red highlighted structure above . to satisfy condition 2 of definition [ balancing ] , we need to satisfy @xmath166 . we can check that @xmath231 has the generators : @xmath232 \ker(\gamma ) \cap \mathbb{r}_{\geq 0}^r = \ { & ( 1 , & 1 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0 , & \ ; 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0),\\ & ( 0 , & 0 , & 1 , & 1 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0 , & \ ; 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0),\\ & ( 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 1 , & 1 , & 0 , & 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0 , & \ ; 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0),\\ & ( 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 1 , & \;1 , & \ ; 0 , & \ ; 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0),\\ & ( 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0 , & \ ; 1 , & \;1 , & \ ; 0),\\ & ( 0 , & 0 , & 1 , & 0 , & 1 , & 1 , & 0 , & 1 , & 1 , & \;0 , & \ ; 1 , & \ ; 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0),\\ & ( 0 , & 0 , & 1 , & 0 , & 1 , & 1 , & 0 , & 1 , & 0 , & \;0 , & \ ; 0 , & \ ; 1 , & \;0 , & \ ; 1 ) \ ; \ ; \;\ } \end{array}\ ] ] the first five vectors correspond to reversible reaction pairs in the crn and so may be ignored . in order to obtain a nontrivial vector @xmath233 , we require @xmath234 . to build such a vector using the sixth vector yields a vector with support on @xmath235 while building it out of the seventh vector yields a vector with support on @xmath236 . neither of these options is consistent with condition 1 of definition [ balancing ] so that the exterior forest is unbalanced . it follows by corollary [ maincorollary ] that the discrete state space crn has a guaranteed extinction event , and that every complex except @xmath188 is transient . in fact , all trajectories are absorbed by a state where @xmath237 , @xmath238 , and @xmath239 for @xmath240 . this result was previously obtained in @xcite and also proved for a simplified crn in @xcite . the construction of the dom - crn , and computational implementation , is unique . this method also suggests a pathway toward extinction through the reactions in the unbalanced exterior forest . such a pathway was not apparent by the methods of either @xcite or @xcite . in this section , we provide further examples which demonstrate how to apply corollary [ maincorollary ] , and also demonstrate the necessity of several of the technical conditions required of the result . example [ example000 ] presents a crn which can be shown to have an extinction event for an absorbing complex set @xmath54 which is not the set of terminal complexes in the dom - crn . example [ example001 ] presents a crn which does not have a guaranteed extinction event , but which can be shown to have an unbalanced exterior forest if we do not insist on the underlying dom - crn being admissible . example [ example999 ] demonstrates that including condition 3 of definition [ balancing ] allows further classification of crns with extinction events than would be possible otherwise . examples [ example100 ] and [ example101 ] provide crns which show that the conditions of corollary [ maincorollary ] are sufficient , but not necessary , for a guaranteed extinction event to occur . [ example000 ] it is natural to wonder whether , when applying corollary [ maincorollary ] , there is an advantage to generalizing the set of terminal complexes to an absorbing complex set @xmath54 . to show that there is , consider the following crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath0 ; ( c2 ) @xmath241 ; ( c3 ) @xmath242 ; ( c4 ) @xmath2 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c3 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c4 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c3 ) ;    there are no domination relations so that the only dom - crn corresponds to the crn shown , and it is trivially admissible . the only exterior forest consists of all reactions . notable , it contains reactions 1 and 2 on the nonterminal component . we can easily determine that @xmath243 satisfies the conditions of definition [ balancing ] and therefore that this exterior forest is balanced . therefore , corollary [ maincorollary ] does not apply and we may not conclude that an extinction event occurs .    consider instead taking @xmath244 . this set is absorbing and contains every terminal complex of the crn . the only exterior forest again contains all reactions but only reaction 1 is @xmath57-exterior . since there is no balancing vector @xmath245 for which @xmath246 , we may conclude by corollary [ maincorollary ] that there is a guaranteed extinction event on @xmath247 . in fact , we can see this directly since repeated application of reaction 1 will deplete @xmath8 and there are no pathways by which to replenish it . [ example001 ] it is natural to wonder whether it is necessary to insist on dom - crns being admissible . to show that removing this assumption from corollary [ maincorollary ] can lead to misclassification , consider the following crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath0 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath187 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c4 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c3 ) ;    the crn has only the single domination relation @xmath248 . since the corresponding domination relation @xmath249 leads to a terminal component in any resulting dom - crn , we may not add it , so that the only admissible dom - crn corresponds to the original crn . suppose , however , that we do not insist on dom - crns being admissible . specifically , suppose we allow the following dom - crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath0 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath187 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c4 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c3 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath152 ( c3 ) ;    the only exterior forest is given in bold red as follows :    ( c1 ) @xmath0 ; ( c2 ) @xmath2 ; ( c3 ) @xmath67 ; ( c4 ) @xmath187 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath170 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath171 ( c4 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath250 ( c3 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath251 ( c3 ) ;    notice that we have included the terminal reactions in the exterior forest . in order to be balanced , we must find a vector @xmath252 which is nonzero on at least one of the nonterminal reactions @xmath253 and @xmath254 , such that @xmath255 conditions 1 and 2 imply that @xmath256 so that @xmath245 is does not have support on the nonterminal portion of the dom - crn . it follows that the exterior forest is unbalanced . note , however , that corollary [ maincorollary ] remains silent since the presented dom - crn is not admissible . since all reactions of the discrete state space crn are recurrent whenever @xmath257 , this example highlights the importance of the assumption that dom - crns be admissible . [ example999 ] it is natural to wonder whether condition 3 of definition [ balancing ] is useful in classifying discrete state space crns with extinction events . to see that it can be , consider the following crn :    ( c4 ) @xmath1 ; ( c5 ) @xmath0 ; ( c6 ) @xmath2 ; ( c4 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c5 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c6 ) ;    there are no domination relations so the dom - crn coincides with the original crn . we have only the following exterior forest in bold red :    ( c1 ) @xmath1 ; ( c2 ) @xmath0 ; ( c3 ) @xmath258 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above left = -0.15 cm ] @xmath170 ( c2 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ below right = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c1 ) ; ( c2 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath171 ( c3 ) ;    in order for this exterior forest to be balanced , we need to have a vector @xmath259 , @xmath178 , which satisfies the following equalities and inequalities : @xmath260 condition 1 reduces condition 2 to @xmath261 , so that , combining with condition 3 , we have @xmath262 this can only be satisfied by @xmath256 and @xmath263 , which is a violation . it follows that the exterior forest is unbalanced and therefore , by corollary [ maincorollary ] , the discrete state space crn has a guaranteed extinction event on the nonterminal complexes @xmath77 and @xmath0 . note , however , that the vector @xmath264 satisfies conditions 1 and 2 of definition [ balancing ] . it follows that condition 3 of definition [ balancing ] allows furthermore classification of crns with extinction events than conditions 1 and 2 allow by themselves . note also that this crn is also not classified as having a guaranteed extinction event by corollary 2 of @xcite . [ example100 ] it is natural to wonder whether the conditions of theorem [ mainresult ] and corollary [ maincorollary ] are necessary as well as sufficient for a discrete state space crn to have an extinction event . to show that they are sufficient only , consider the following crn , which is simplified from the crn in eqn . ( 66 ) of @xcite and reproduced as eqn . ( 49 ) in the supplemental material for @xcite :    ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath67 ; ( c3 ) @xmath265 ; ( c4 ) @xmath266 ; ( c5 ) @xmath267 ; ( c6 ) @xmath268 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c6 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c5 ) ;    the crn has a guaranteed discrete extinction event , since @xmath187 may convert into @xmath8 through reaction 3 , then @xmath8 may convert into @xmath67 through reaction 1 . this shuts down all reactions .    to show that corollary [ maincorollary ] is incapable of affirming this extinction event , it is necessary to show that every @xmath57-exterior forest of every @xmath57-admissible dom - crn is unbalanced . we start by considering the terminal complexes and the set @xmath269 . this gives the following dom - crn :    ( c3 ) @xmath265 ; ( c4 ) @xmath266 ; ( c5 ) @xmath267 ; ( c6 ) @xmath268 ; ( ghost ) ; ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath67 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c6 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c5 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath146 ( c1 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath147 ( c1 ) ;    this dom - crn is admissible and admits only a single exterior forest in bold red :    ( c3 ) @xmath265 ; ( c4 ) @xmath266 ; ( c5 ) @xmath267 ; ( c6 ) @xmath268 ; ( ghost ) ; ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath67 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath170 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath173 ( c4 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath171 ( c6 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c5 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath226 ( c1 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath172 ( c1 ) ;    this forest is balanced if we have a nontrivial vector @xmath270 + @xmath271 , @xmath272 , which satisfies the following : @xmath273 this can be satisfied by the vector @xmath274 . it follows that the forest is balanced , and since this is the only exterior forest for the given dom - crn , no conclusion may be reached as a result of corollary [ maincorollary ] . we now consider more general absorbing complex sets @xmath54 . notice that any potential @xmath57 which contains a subset of @xmath275 can be balanced by the @xmath245 above , with perhaps different support on @xmath276 . if @xmath277 , however , we must have @xmath278 in order for the dom - crn to be @xmath57-admissible . otherwise , we would have an edge in @xmath151 which would lead to @xmath57 . for @xmath278 , however , we have that @xmath279 and @xmath280 are terminal in the dom - crn and therefore @xmath267 and @xmath268 must be included in @xmath57 . this leaves @xmath58 which has an empty exterior forest . there are no other cases to consider , so we are done . it follows that every @xmath57-exterior forest of every @xmath57-admissible dom - crn is balanced . since the crn has a guaranteed extinction event , however , it follows that the conditions of corollary [ maincorollary ] are not necessary for extinction events in discrete state space crns . [ example101 ]    to show that the gap raised in example [ example100 ] may not be easily overcome by structural considerations alone , consider the following crn :    ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath67 ; ( c3 ) @xmath281 ; ( c4 ) @xmath280 ; ( c5 ) @xmath194 ; ( c6 ) @xmath197 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c6 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c5 ) ;    this is the crn in example [ example100 ] with @xmath187 replaced with @xmath188 in the reaction 2 , and @xmath188 replaced with @xmath282 in reactions 3 and 4 . examples [ example100 ] and [ example101 ] share significant structural data , including connectivity of paths , domination relations between complexes , and ker@xmath283 . taking @xmath284 gives the following admissible dom - crn :    ( c3 ) @xmath281 ; ( c4 ) @xmath280 ; ( c5 ) @xmath194 ; ( c6 ) @xmath197 ; ( ghost ) ; ( c1 ) @xmath8 ; ( c2 ) @xmath67 ; ( c1 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath3 ( c2 ) ; ( c3 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath4 ( c4 ) ; ( c5 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath5 ( c6 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath198 ( c5 ) ; ( c4 ) edge node [ above = -0.15 cm ] @xmath146 ( c1 ) ; ( c6 ) edge node [ below = -0.15 cm ] @xmath147 ( c1 ) ;    we arrive at the same balancing equalities and inequalities ( [ conditions ] ) as example [ example100 ] , so that every @xmath57-exterior forest on this dom - crn is balanced . since the connectivity and domination relations are shared with example [ example100 ] , we can exhaust nontrivial @xmath57-admissible dom - crns in the same way , and we conclude that corollary [ maincorollary ] is inconclusive . in contrast to example [ example100 ] , this example does not exhibit an extinction event for most initial conditions . provided @xmath237 , @xmath285 , and any one of @xmath286 , @xmath287 , and @xmath288 is positive , every complex is recurrent . this analysis suggests that comprehensive conditions for extinction events must depend on further structural information than that considered in this paper . in this paper , we have presented novel conditions ( theorem [ mainresult ] and corollary [ maincorollary ] ) on the structure of a crn that are sufficient to guarantee that the corresponding crn exhibits an extinction event . the conditions presented generalize the dependence on terminal slcs in @xcite and @xcite , and also produces a system of equalities and inequalities which can be directly verified . our conditions have the additional advantage of being fundamentally graphical in nature and suggesting pathways to extinction . this work raises several promising avenues for future work :    1 .   while corollary [ maincorollary ] gives sufficient conditions for discrete extinction , they are not necessary ( see examples [ example100 ] and [ example101 ] ) . this raises the question of whether there are structural conditions which are both sufficient and necessary for discrete extinction and , if so , which further structural components of the crn might be utilized in such a result . the conditions of corollary [ maincorollary ] consist of a system of equalities and inequalities . this suggests a computational implementation amenable , in particular , to the methods of linear programming . linear programming has already been used widely in crnt for verifying crns with desirable structural properties @xcite . this will be explored and utilized to characterize crns with extinction events in the companion paper @xcite . mdj and dfa were supported by army research office grant w911nf-14 - 1 - 0401 . dfa was also supported by nsf - dms-1318832 and mdj was also supported by the henry woodward fund . gc was supported by nsf - dms-1412643 . rb is a postdoctoral fellow of the research foundation  flanders ( fwo ) .    10    david  f. anderson . a modified next reaction method for simulating chemical systems with time dependent propensities and delays . , 127(21):214107 , 2007 . david  f. anderson , daniele cappelletti , and thomas  g. kurtz . finite time distributions of stochastically modeled chemical systems with absolute concentration robustness . available on the arxiv at arxiv:1604.03388 , 2016 . david  f. anderson , gheorghe craciun , and thomas  g. kurtz . product - form stationary distributions for deficiency zero chemical reaction networks . , 72(8):19471970 , 2011 . david  f. anderson , german enciso , and matthew  d. johnston . stochastic analysis of chemical reaction networks with absolute concentration robustness . , 11(93):20130943 , 2014 . david  f. anderson and thomas  g. kurtz . continuous time markov chain models for chemical reaction networks . in h.  koeppl et  al . , editor , _ design and analysis of biomolecular circuits : engineering approaches to systems and synthetic biology _ , pages 342 . springer , 2011 . david  f. anderson and thomas  g. kurtz . . springer , 2015 . falko bause and pieter  s. kritzinger . . vieweg verlag 2 . aufl . , 2002 . balzs boros . on the dependence of the existence of the positive steady states on the rate coefficients for deficiency - one mass action systems : single linkage class . , 51(9):24552490 , 2013 .    robert brijder . dominant and t - invariants for petri nets and chemical reaction networks . , 9211:115 , 2015 . gheorghe craciun , alicia dickenstein , anne shiu , and bernd sturmfels . toric dynamical systems . , 44(11):15511565 , 2009 . german  a. enciso . transient absolute robustness in stochastic biochemical networks . , 13(121):20160475 , 2016 . martin feinberg . lectures on chemical reaction networks . unpublished written versions of lectures given at the mathematics research center , university of wisconsin . martin feinberg . complex balancing in general kinetic systems . , 49:187194 , 1972 . martin feinberg . chemical reaction network structure and the stability of complex isothermal reactors : i. the deficiency zero and deficiency one theorems . , 42(10):22292268 , 1987 . martin feinberg . chemical reaction network structure and the stability of complex isothermal reactors : ii . multiple steady states for networks of deficiency one . , 43(1):125 , 1988 . michael  a. gibson and jehoshua bruck . efficient exact stochastic simulation of chemical systems with many species and many channels . , 104:18761889 , 2000 . daniel gillespie . a general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evolution of coupled chemical reactions . , 22(4):403434 , 1976 . fritz horn . necessary and sufficient conditions for complex balancing in chemical kinetics . , 49:172186 , 1972 . fritz horn and roy jackson . general mass action kinetics . , 47:81116 , 1972 . matthew  d. johnston . translated chemical reaction networks . , 76(5):10811116 , 2014 . matthew  d. johnston . a linear programming approach to dynamical equivalence , linear conjugacy , and the deficiency one theorem . , 54(8):16121631 , 2016 . matthew d. johnston . a computational approach to extinction events in chemical reaction networks with discrete state spaces . available on the arxiv at arxiv:1701.02014 , 2017 . matthew  d. johnston , casian pantea , and pete donnell . a computational approach to persistence , permanence , and endotacticity of chemical reaction networks . , 72(1):467498 , 2016 . matthew  d. johnston , david siegel , and gbor szederknyi . a linear programming approach to weak reversibility and linear conjugacy of chemical reaction networks . , 50(1):274288 , 2012 . tom  g. kurtz . the relationship between stochastic and deterministic models for chemical reactions . , 57:29762978 , 1972 . gregory f. lawler . chapman & hall , 2006 . grard memmi and grard roucairol . linear algebra in net theory . in wilfried brauer , editor , _ net theory and applications _ , volume  84 of _ lecture notes in comput . _ , pages 213223 . springer , 1975 . jost neigenfind , sergio grimbs , and zoran nikoloski . biochemical network decomposition reveals absolute concentration robustness . available on the arxiv at arxiv:1105.0624v1 . james  l. peterson . petri nets . , 9(3):223252 , 1977 . wolfgang reisig and grzegorz rozenberg , editors . , volume 1491 of _ lecture notes in comput . _ springer , 1998 . loc paulev , gheorghe craciun , and keinz koeppl . dynamical properties of discrete reaction networks . , 69(1):5572 , 2014 . guy shinar and martin feinberg . structural sources of robustness in biochemical reaction networks . , 327(5971):13891391 , 2010 . gabor szederknyi . computing sparse and dense realizations of reaction kinetic systems . , 47:551568 , 2010 . * lemma [ terminallemma ] . * _ if a crn is subconservative , then for any dom - crn : ( i ) the slcs of the crn and the dom - crn coincide , and ( ii ) every terminal slc of the dom - crn is a terminal slc of the crn . _ _ proof of ( i ) : _ consider a subconservative crn and dom - crn . since the reactions of the crn are contained in the reactions of the dom - crn , it follows that the slcs of crn remain strongly connected in the dom - crn and therefore are contained in the slcs of the dom - crn . now suppose that there is an slc of the dom - crn which is not contained in any slc of the crn . it follows that there are slcs @xmath289 of the crn such that is a path in the dom - crn from some complex @xmath290 to some complex @xmath291 , and there is a path in the dom - crn from some complex @xmath292 to some complex @xmath293 . since @xmath294 and @xmath295 are strongly connected , we can create a cycle in the dom - crn by constructing a path from @xmath296 to @xmath297 to @xmath298 to @xmath299 back to @xmath296 . furthermore , since this is not a cycle in the crn ( otherwise , @xmath294 and @xmath295 would not be maximally strongly connected in the crn ) , we have that there is at least one reaction in this cycle which is from @xmath151 . we now index the complexes in the cycle so that , if there are @xmath300 reactions from @xmath151 in the cycle , we have the following segments in between these reactions : @xmath301 we take the segments above to be connected by reactions in @xmath302 . we also take @xmath303 and @xmath304 so that the endpoints of successive segments are joined together by @xmath305 . let @xmath306 denote the vector of counts of the reactions in ( [ cycle ] ) , and take @xmath307 . it follows that @xmath308 by the domination relations @xmath303 . since the crn is subconservative , it follows that there is a @xmath62 such that @xmath309 . it follows that we have @xmath310 \alpha = \mathbf{c}^t [ \gamma \alpha ] > 0\ ] ] where the last strict inequality follows from @xmath311 for @xmath312 and the observation that at least one component in ( [ 10 ] ) must be strictly greater than zero since the complexes of the crn are stoichiometrically distinct . this is a contradiction . it follows that such a cycle does not exist in the dom - crn so that @xmath294 and @xmath295 are slcs of the crn . the slcs of the crn and dom - crn therefore coincide and ( i ) is shown . + _ proof of ( ii ) : _ note that ( i ) guarantees that the crn and dom - crn share the same set of slcs which we will denote @xmath46 . suppose that @xmath47 is terminal in the dom - crn but not in the crn . this implies that there is a reaction @xmath25 where @xmath313 and @xmath314 ; however , this reaction is included in the dom - crn so that @xmath294 may not be terminal in the dom - crn . it follows that every terminal slc of the dom - crn is a terminal slc of the crn , and ( ii ) is shown . * theorem [ mainresult ] . * _ consider a subconservative crn and a @xmath57-admissible dom - crn where @xmath54 is an absorbing complex set on the dom - crn . suppose that there is a complex @xmath157 of the dom - crn which is recurrent from a state @xmath184 in the discrete state space crn . then every @xmath57-exterior forest of the dom - crn is balanced . _    the following proof is inspired by the proof of theorem 1 in @xcite . the notation has been adapted to that of crnt . consider a subconservative crn and a @xmath57-admissible dom - crn where @xmath54 is an absorbing complex set on the dom - crn . suppose that there is a complex @xmath157 of the dom - crn which is recurrent from a state @xmath184 . we will show that every @xmath57-exterior forest is balanced ; that is , every @xmath57-exterior forest admits a vector @xmath315 satisfying the requirements of definition [ balancing ] . we will accomplish this by constructing a sequence of reactions which may be executed indefinitively , and then demonstrating that this sequence repeats . we will define @xmath245 based on a specific repeating portion of this sequence and show that it is balanced . let @xmath103 denote our initial state . by assumption , there is a state @xmath316 and a complex @xmath317 such that ( i ) @xmath318 , ( ii ) @xmath319 is charged at @xmath320 , and ( iii ) no complex @xmath157 is charged at any state along the sequence of reactions from @xmath318 . that is , @xmath319 is the first @xmath57-exterior complex which becomes charged as a result of the reaction sequence . ( if @xmath319 is charged at @xmath87 then the sequence of reactions is empty . ) by construction , there is a unique path in the exterior forest from @xmath319 to @xmath57 . let @xmath321 denote the complex at the end of this path and @xmath322 denote the state obtained by the sequential occurrence of the true reactions in the path ( i.e. include reactions in @xmath323 but exclude domination relations @xmath324 ) . note that ( i ) @xmath325 , and ( ii ) @xmath326 is charged at @xmath327 . we now iterate this procedure for @xmath328 starting from the state @xmath329 rather than @xmath87 . this generates the following sequence of transitions , which may be continued indefinitely by the recurrence assumption : @xmath330 since the crn is subconservative , we have that there is a finite number of accessible states ( theorem 1 , @xcite ) . it follows that there is a state in @xmath331 which is repeated . we let @xmath332 and @xmath333 where @xmath334 denote the first and second indices for the set @xmath331 such that @xmath335 . this gives the following subsequence of ( [ stuff1 ] ) @xmath336 since @xmath335 , ( [ stuff2 ] ) defines a sequence of reactions which can be repeated indefinitely . we now define the vector @xmath160 in the following way : ( i ) @xmath233 consists of the counts of the reactions in the sequence of reactions in ( [ stuff2 ] ) , and ( ii ) @xmath276 consists of the counts of the domination relations in the paths taken to construct the reaction sequences in ( [ stuff2 ] ) . we now show that @xmath245 if balanced according to definition [ balancing ] . it is clear , first of all , that @xmath245 only has support on @xmath323 and @xmath324 so that condition @xmath3 is satisfied . in order to show that @xmath337 , we note from eqn . ( [ markov ] ) of the main text , and the definition of @xmath233 , that @xmath338 it follows that @xmath337 and therefore @xmath245 satisfies condition @xmath4 of definition [ balancing ] . to verify condition @xmath5 , we note that , since @xmath339 is always chosen to be the first complex exterior to @xmath57 which becomes charged , the only contribution to @xmath245 from the nonterminal component comes from the segments corresponding to @xmath340 , i.e. the paths from @xmath339 to @xmath57 . it follows that , at every complex exterior to @xmath57 , the count of the reaction out is at least as great as the sum of the reactions in , and @xmath245 therefore satisfies condition @xmath5 of definition [ balancing ] . the result is therefore shown . we define the following , which extends definition [ recurrence ] . consider a crn on a discrete state space . an slc @xmath47 is said to be * recurrent * from state @xmath103 if every @xmath313 is recurrent from @xmath87 ; otherwise , we will say @xmath294 is * transient * from @xmath87 .    in other words , an slc is recurrent if every complex @xmath33 in the slc is recurrent . we now consider how the transient and recurrence of complexes may be distributed throughout a crn . [ lemma10 ] consider a crn on a discrete state space . then a complex @xmath313 is recurrent if and only if the slc @xmath47 is recurrent . let @xmath47 denote an slc of a crn . suppose @xmath313 is recurrent from @xmath103 and @xmath341 . from the recurrence of @xmath33 , it follows that , for every @xmath104 such that @xmath109 , there is a @xmath342 such that @xmath112 and @xmath33 is charged at @xmath111 . since @xmath33 and @xmath39 belong to the same linkage class , it follows that there is a path from @xmath33 to @xmath39 . it follows that there is a @xmath343 such that @xmath344 and @xmath39 is charged at @xmath345 . we have used the observation that reactions in a path in the reaction graph may occur in sequence since each reaction necessarily produces sufficient molecularity for the next reaction to proceed . we therefore have that @xmath346 so that , for every @xmath104 , such that @xmath109 , there is a @xmath343 such that @xmath347 and @xmath39 is charged at @xmath345 . it follows that @xmath39 is recurrent from @xmath87 , and we are done . this result shows that complex and slcs recurrent is equivalent in the sense that we may not have one without the other . we may further relate recurrence to the reaction graph of crn with the following . [ lemma1 ] consider a crn on a discrete state space and a dom - crn . suppose there is a path in the maximal dom - crn from a complex @xmath313 to a complex @xmath348 where @xmath349 are two slcs of the crn . then the following hold :    1 . if @xmath294 is recurrent from @xmath103 , then @xmath295 is recurrent from @xmath87 . if @xmath295 is transient from @xmath103 , then @xmath294 is transient from @xmath87 . the set of recurrent complexes is an absorbing complex set of the maximal dom - crn consisting of the union of slcs . let @xmath289 denote an slc of a crn and suppose @xmath294 is recurrent from @xmath103 . suppose there is a path in the dom - crn from a complex @xmath313 to a complex @xmath348 . it follows that , for every @xmath104 such that @xmath109 , there is a @xmath342 such that @xmath112 and @xmath33 is charged at @xmath111 . now consider the path in the dom - crn from @xmath33 to @xmath39 . the path may be composed of reactions in @xmath302 or @xmath151 . we have that , for any sequence of reactions in the path which are only from @xmath302 , if the path starts with a recurrent complex , recurrence is transferred to every complex in the path , including the final one . this can be realized by noting that the occurrence of each reaction necessarily confers sufficient molecularity for the next reaction in the path to take place . also notice that , for any reaction in @xmath151 , say @xmath350 we have @xmath351 for all @xmath352 . it follows that , if @xmath353 is charged at a state , then @xmath354 is charged at the state . combining these two results , we have that there is a @xmath343 such that @xmath344 and @xmath39 is charged at @xmath345 . it follows that @xmath39 is recurrent from @xmath87 . it follows that @xmath295 is recurrent from lemma [ lemma10 ] . this proves claim @xmath3 and , since claim @xmath4 is the contrapositive of claim @xmath3 , this is also shown . claim @xmath5 follows by noting that , if @xmath54 is the set of recurrent complexes but is not an absorbing complex set in the maximal dom - crn then there is a reaction @xmath355 such that @xmath356 and @xmath357 . it then follows from claim @xmath3 that @xmath358 is recurrent , which contradicts the construction of @xmath57 . since the set of recurrent complexes must consist of the union of slcs by lemma [ lemma10 ] , the result is shown . this result gives restrictions on the distribution of transient and recurrent complexes and slcs within a crn . recurrence travels with the direction of the paths in the dom - crn while transience travels against the direction of these paths . claim @xmath5 furthermore suggests that absorbing complex sets are the correct object of study when considering recurrence and transience in discrete state space crns . consider the following example . consider the crn structure contained in figure [ figure1 ] , where the boxes represent slcs . we write @xmath359 if there is a path from some @xmath360 to @xmath361 in the crn , and we write @xmath362 if @xmath363 for some @xmath360 and @xmath361 . in ( b ) and ( c ) , potential patterns for recurrent slcs consistent with lemma [ lemma1 ] are highlighted . if @xmath364 is recurrent , @xmath365 and @xmath366 must be recurrent as well ( red ) . if @xmath367 is recurrent , @xmath368 and @xmath369 must be recurrent as well ( green ) . note that in ( c ) this recurrence implication flows through the domination relationship . note also that lemma [ terminallemma ] guarantees that a subconservative crn may not contain any cycles in the representation figure [ figure1 ] . slcs . in ( b ) and ( c ) , two possible configurations of recurrent slcs ( red and green , respectively ) are presented which are consistent with lemma [ lemma1].,width=453 ]    for subconservative crns , another way to interpret lemma [ lemma1 ] is by introducing the order operation @xmath370 on the slcs of a crn , where @xmath371 if there are @xmath313 and @xmath348 such that @xmath372 . in @xcite , r. brijder showed that the transition closure of this operator is a partial order on the slcs of a subconservative crn . we extend this slightly by defining the relation @xmath373 to be such that @xmath374 if either @xmath371 or there is a path from a complex @xmath348 to a complex @xmath313 in the crn , and then let @xmath375 denote the transitive closure of @xmath373 . since the relation @xmath375 corresponds to path - connectedness in the dom - crn , lemma [ terminallemma ] is equivalent to the property of @xmath375 being a partial order on the slcs of a subconservative crn . in this interpretation , the minimal slcs of the crn under the partial order @xmath375 correspond to the terminal slcs of the dom - crn . we may then interpret lemma [ lemma1 ] as stating that , for a subconservative crn with slcs @xmath349 such that @xmath376 , ( a ) if @xmath294 is recurrent from @xmath103 , then @xmath295 is recurrent from @xmath87 , and ( b ) if @xmath295 is transient from @xmath103 , then @xmath294 is transient from @xmath87 . that is , relative to the partial order @xmath375 on slcs of a subconservative crn , recurrence flows downward while transience flows upward . petri nets form a well - studied model of concurrent computation , see , e.g. , @xcite . petri nets are essentially . however , this difference is irrelevant for this paper . ] equivalent to crns on discrete state spaces . as a consequence , results concerning crns on discrete state spaces can be equivalently stated in terms of petri nets and vice versa .    in a petri net ( without initial marking ) @xmath377 , species are called _ places _ ( i.e. , @xmath378 ) , reactions are called _ transitions _ ( i.e. , @xmath379 ) , and the stoichiometric coefficients of each reaction is encoded by a function @xmath380 . moreover , molecules are called _ tokens _ and states @xmath87 are called _ markings _ @xmath381 . furthermore , the stoichiometric matrix @xmath382 is known as the _ incidence matrix _ of a petri net , conservation vectors @xmath383 are known as _ @xmath384-invariants _ , and vectors @xmath385 such that @xmath386 are known as _ graphical depictions are different for petri nets compared to crns . for example , consider the following example . reconsider the crn from example [ example234 ] , which is represented graphically in figure  [ fig : petri ] . in the setting of petri nets , species / places are denoted by circles and reactions / transitions by boxes . moreover , the reactants of a reaction / transition are the incoming edges of that transition ( including multiplicity as edge labels ) and the products of a reaction / transition are the outgoing edges of that transition ( including multiplicity as edge labels ) . the petri net has the incidence matrix : @xmath387 a @xmath384-invariant is given by the vector @xmath388 and @xmath9-invariants by the vectors @xmath389 and @xmath390 .
Abstract:

Answer: we study chemical reaction networks with discrete state spaces , such as the standard continuous time markov chain model , and present sufficient conditions on the structure of the network that guarantee the system exhibits an extinction event . the conditions we derive involve creating a modified chemical reaction network called a domination - expanded reaction network and then checking properties of this network . we apply the results to several networks including an envz - ompr signaling pathway in _ escherichia coli_. this analysis produces a system of equalities and inequalities which , in contrast to previous results on extinction events , allows algorithmic implementation . such an implementation will be investigated in a companion paper where the results are applied to 458 models from the european bioinformatics institute s biomodels database .    [ section ] [ section ] [ section ] [ section ] [ section ] [ section ]    * keywords : * reaction network , reaction graph , extinction , stochastic process , petri net * ams subject classifications : * 92c42 , 60j27