Bayesian Regression Quantifies Uncertainty of Binding Parameters from Isothermal Titration Calorimetry More Accurately Than Error Propagation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript entitled "Bayesian Regression Quantifies Uncertainty of Binding Parameters from Isothermal Titration Calorimetry More Accurately than Error Propagation" applies 3 different uncertainty quantification techniques to the same simulation. Then, experimental data is used to evaluate the uncertainties calculated with these various techniques.

Major Comments:
1. Although the paper is relatively brief, the clear objective of the manuscript enables important results to be communicated with concision.
2. May be helpful to readers that each of the three uncertainty quantification methods are formulated, in the context of the application, in the "Materials and Methods" sections with their own subsections.
3. "Integrated Heat Data" section effectively cites other studies to avoid detailed explanation in the current paper.
4. It is great practice to make the code available on github

Minor Comments:
1. Line 86 should cite scipy: https://scipy.org/citing-scipy/

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for taking the time to read and provide feedback on our manuscript. Point-by-point responses to the reviewer comments (in black) are below.

The manuscript entitled "Bayesian Regression Quantifies Uncertainty of Binding Parameters from Isothermal Titration Calorimetry More Accurately than Error Propagation" applies 3 different uncertainty quantification techniques to the same simulation. Then, experimental data is used to evaluate the uncertainties calculated with these various techniques.

Major Comments:
1. Although the paper is relatively brief, the clear objective of the manuscript enables important results to be communicated with concision.

Thank you for the compliment.

2. May be helpful to readers that each of the three uncertainty quantification methods are formulated, in the context of the application, in the "Materials and Methods" sections with their own subsections.

As suggested, we have added subsection labels.

3. "Integrated Heat Data" section effectively cites other studies to avoid detailed explanation in the current paper.

Thank you for the compliment.

4. It is great practice to make the code available on github

Thank you for the compliment. This availability is mentioned under data availability.

Minor Comments:
1. Line 86 should cite scipy: https://scipy.org/citing-scipy/

We have added the citation.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article is dedicated to the comparison of several methods for quantifying the uncertainty of binding parameters estimated from isothermal titration calorimetry data. The issue considered in the work is relevant. New and interesting results have been obtained in the paper. I consider that the article corresponds to the journal subject and can be published after minor correction. My remarks are the following:

1) I did not see a reference to Fig. 3.

2) The "Conclusions" section consists of only one sentence. I believe that for a better understanding of the results of the study, it is necessary to provide a more detailed description of the findings.

Author Response

We thank the reviewer for taking the time to read and provide feedback on our manuscript. Point-by-point responses to the reviewer comments (in black) are below.

The article is dedicated to the comparison of several methods for quantifying the uncertainty of binding parameters estimated from isothermal titration calorimetry data. The issue considered in the work is relevant. New and interesting results have been obtained in the paper. I consider that the article corresponds to the journal subject and can be published after minor correction.

Thank you for the kind words.

My remarks are the following:

1) I did not see a reference to Fig. 3.

In line 125 we had incorrectly referred to Fig. 1 when we meant Fig. 3. This has been corrected.

2) The "Conclusions" section consists of only one sentence. I believe that for a better understanding of the results of the study, it is necessary to provide a more detailed description of the findings.

We have expanded the conclusions section.