The application of probability-generating functions to linear–quadratic radiation survival curves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To illustrate how probability-generating functions (PGFs) can be employed to derive a simple probabilistic model for clonogenic survival after exposure to ionizing irradiation. METHODS: Both repairable and irreparable radiation damage to DNA were assumed to occur by independent (Poisson) processes, at intensities proportional to the irradiation dose. Also, repairable damage was assumed to be either repaired or further (lethally) injured according to a third (Bernoulli) process, with the probability of lethal conversion being directly proportional to dose. Using the algebra of PGFs, these three processes were combined to yield a composite PGF that described the distribution of lethal DNA lesions in irradiated cells. RESULTS: The composite PGF characterized a Poisson distribution with mean, chiD+betaD2, where D was dose and alpha and beta were radiobiological constants. This distribution yielded the conventional linear-quadratic survival equation. To test the composite model, the derived distribution was used to predict the frequencies of multiple chromosomal aberrations in irradiated human lymphocytes. The predictions agreed well with observation. This probabilistic model was consistent with single-hit mechanisms, but it was not consistent with binary misrepair mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: A stochastic model for radiation survival has been constructed from elementary PGFs that exactly yields the linear-quadratic relationship. This approach can be used to investigate other simple probabilistic survival models.
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 | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".