MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158453570 · doi:10.5430/jst.v3n4p22

The role of disparity-mutagenesis model on tumor development with special reference to increased mutation rate

2013· article· en· W2158453570 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mitsuru Furusawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Solid Tumors · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutation rateMutationMutagenesisCarcinogenesisBiologyMutation AccumulationGeneticsCancerCancer researchGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human solid tumors are believed to have very high mutation rates at least in the early stage of extension. Irrespective ofwhether the increased mutation rate is a necessary condition for the tumor development or not, extremely high mutationrates such as in excess of the so-called “threshold” would before long result in the natural death of tumor cells. In reality,however, we are dying by cancer. Thus, it has been hypothesized that tumor cells should make a quick transition from thehigher mutation state to the lower one. According to our “disparity-mutagenesis model”, however, carcinogenesis couldcontinue without any incident even under a prolonged period of high mutation rates. Namely, if lagging-strand-biasedmutations far beyond the threshold of mutation rate are introduced in tumor cells, the tumor could progress to malignantextension without extinction. The results of evolution experiments using mutator microorganisms are discussed in terms ofcarcinogenesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Solid TumorsSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207