INTEGRATION OF ANGIOGENESIS MODULES AT MULTIPLE SCALES: FROM MOLECULAR TO TISSUE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiscale modeling has emerged as a powerful approach to interpret and capitalize on the biological complexity underlying blood vessel growth. We present a multiscale model of angiogenesis that heralds the start of a large scale initiative to integrate related biological models. The goal of the integrative project is to better understand underlying biological mechanisms from the molecular level up through the organ systems level, and test new therapeutic strategies. Model methodology includes ordinary and partial differential equations, stochastic models, complex logical rules, and agent-based architectures. Current modules represent blood flow, oxygen transport, growth factor distribution and signaling, cell sensing, cell movement and cell proliferation. Challenges of integration lie in connecting modules that are diversely designed, seamlessly coordinating feedback, and representing spatial and time scales from ligand-receptor interactions and intracellular signaling, to cell-level movement and cell-matrix interactions, to vessel branching and capillary network formation, to tissue level characteristics, to organ system response. We briefly introduce the individual modules, discuss our approach to integration, present initial results from the coordination of modules, and propose solutions to some critical issues facing angiogenesis multiscale modeling and integration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".