GRID macroscopic growth law and its application to image inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In computational anatomy large deformations of anatomical structures observed in images are represented by diffeomorphic flows on the background space of coordinates. They are usually maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimates obtained by minimization of the cost function (posterior energy) consistent with the material properties of an organism. This paper constructs the underlying transformations induced by biological growth according to the Growth as Random Iterated Diffeomorphisms (GRID) model proposed by U. Grenander. They are diffeomorphic flows generated by the GRID macroscopic growth integro-differential equation that emphasizes dependency of the flow on such GRID variables as the Poisson intensity of cell decisions and relative rate of expansion/contraction. We explore some cost function models that yield biologically meaningful estimates of these growth parameters. Namely, we seek a prior energy that measures cell activities represented by the Poisson intensity function. Using the macroscopic growth law we formulate an optimal control problem where the GRID variables are optimal controls that force an image of the initial organism to be continuously transformed into an image of the grown organism. We apply the Polak-Ribière conjugate gradient algorithm for direct estimation of the growth parameters from given images. Then the biological mapping is automatically obtained from estimated growth parameters. The accuracy of GRID variable and image estimates obtained by the inference algorithm depends on the value of the weighting coefficient of the prior energy. We propose an experimental evaluation of this coefficient and reveal growth patterns expressed in GRID variables hidden in confocal micrographs of Wingless gene expression patterns in the larval Drosophila wing disc.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".