MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2251128624 · doi:10.1080/17513758.2015.1115564

A delay differential equation model of follicle waves in women

2015· article· en· W2251128624 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nicole Marie Panza, Andrew A. Wright, James F. Selgrade

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Dynamics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian function and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Mathematical and Physical SciencesUniversity of SaskatchewanNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDifferential equationFollicleDifferential (mechanical device)PhysicsBiologyMathematicsMathematical analysisEndocrinologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a mathematical model for hormonal regulation of the menstrual cycle which predicts the occurrence of follicle waves in normally cycling women. Several follicles of ovulatory size that develop sequentially during one menstrual cycle are referred to as follicle waves. The model consists of 13 nonlinear, delay differential equations with 51 parameters. Model simulations exhibit a unique stable periodic cycle and this menstrual cycle accurately approximates blood levels of ovarian and pituitary hormones found in the biological literature. Numerical experiments illustrate that the number of follicle waves corresponds to the number of rises in pituitary follicle stimulating hormone. Modifications of the model equations result in simulations which predict the possibility of two ovulations at different times during the same menstrual cycle and, hence, the occurrence of dizygotic twins via a phenomenon referred to as superfecundation. Sensitive parameters are identified and bifurcations in model behaviour with respect to parameter changes are discussed. Studying follicle waves may be helpful for improving female fertility and for understanding some aspects of female reproductive ageing.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological DynamicsSame topicOvarian function and disordersFrench-language works237,207