MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600491254 · doi:10.1101/121053

Classical Cancer Biology: Misconceptions and Limitations

2017· preprint· en· W2600491254 on OpenAlexaff
Abicumaran Uthamacumaran

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicChemical Reactions and Isotopes
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpigeneticsBiologyCancerCancer cellSystems biologyEpigenesisCancer stem cellComputational biologySomatic evolution in cancerTelomereGeneGeneticsDNA methylationGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer is the co-evolution of cancer cells and their turbulent microenvironment, characterized by dynamical hyper-chaotic gene expression profiles. However, cancers should not be viewed as the result of random mutations and malfunctioning information processing systems. Rather, it is the selective advantages conferred by adaptive evolution of cellular biosystems. Although on a systemic scale, cancer is defined as a disease, on a cellular basis they outperform healthy (non-transformed cells) in terms of survival and reproductive success. Their enhanced longevity pathways, metastatic invasion, extended telomeres, dynamical morphogenesis, regenerative stem cell division and environment-specific metabolic cascades indicate they are adaptive evolutionary cell states that have surpassed the boundaries normal cells are confined to. Therefore, the paper presents a brief summary of currently existing classical cancer models in the field of mathematical biology and the misconceptions of cancer epimetabolomes to further advance cancer research beyond its current limits. Through an insight into the mathematical behaviors of cancer cells, a quantum adaptive epigenetic landscape is proposed to explain the selective evolutionary dominance of cancer cells.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.030
Scholarly communication0.0050.015
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0040.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicChemical Reactions and IsotopesFrench-language works237,207