Neural network assessment of herbal protection against chemotherapeutic-induced reproductive toxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to assess the protective effects of Ginkgo biloba's (GB) extract against chemotherapeutic-induced reproductive toxicity using a data mining tool, namely Neural Network Clustering (NNC) on two types of data: biochemical & fertility indicators and Texture Analysis (TA) parameters. GB extract (1 g/kg/day) was given orally to male albino rats for 26 days. This period began 21 days before a single cisplatin (CIS) intraperitoneal injection (10 mg/kg body weight). GB given orally significantly restored reproductive function. Tested extract also notably reduced the CIS-induced reproductive toxicity, as evidenced by restoring normal morphology of testes. In GB, the attenuation of CIS-induced damage was associated with less apoptotic cell death both in the testicular tissue and in the sperms. CIS-induced alterations of testicular lipid peroxidation were markedly improved by the examined plant extract. NNC has been used for classifying animal groups based on the quantified biochemical & fertility indicators and microscopic image texture parameters extracted by TA. NNC showed the separation of two clusters and the distribution of groups among them in a way that signifies the dose-dependent protective effect of GB. The present study introduces the neural network as a powerful tool to assess both biochemical and histopathological data. We also show here that herbal protection against CIS-induced reproductive toxicity utilizing classic methodologies is validated using neural network analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".