MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088631628 · doi:10.1115/1.1583758

Computational modeling of cell sorting, tissue engulfment, and related phenomena: A review

2004· review· en· W2088631628 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mechanics Reviews · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational modelComputer scienceMorphogenesisComplement (music)HomogeneousBiologyCognitive scienceComputational biologyArtificial intelligenceStatistical physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embryonic cells have the remarkable ability to spontaneously reposition themselves with respect to other cells in an aggregate, an ability that is central to embryo morphogenesis, many disease processes, wound healing, and tissue engineering. In these rearrangements, cells of two or more histological types in a heterotypic aggregate can sort, mix or form checkerboard patterns and contacting fragments of different homogeneous tissues can spread over or engulf one another. In this article, the experimental literature on cell and tissue reorganization is summarized, the main sub-cellular structural components are identified and hypotheses about how these components interact to drive specific patterns of rearrangement are outlined. Making extensive use of tables, the article then maps out the interplay between experiments, theories, ultrastructural discoveries and computer models in the advancement of the field. The article summarizes the main computational approaches, including cell and sub-cellular lattices, body centric, boundary vertex and finite element models. The principle of operation, advantages and disadvantages of each approach is discussed, and the contributions of representative papers noted. Strong commonalities are found in the physical basis of the models and in the predictions they make. Computational models provide an important ongoing complement to experimental and theoretical studies. This review article cites 154 references.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it