MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606074678 · doi:10.1080/17513758.2017.1310939

Existence and uniqueness for a coupled PDE model for motor-induced microtubule organization

2017· article· en· W2606074678 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Hillen, Gerda de Vries, Adriana T. Dawes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Dynamics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsUniquenessMotor proteinMicrotubuleMolecular motorPartial differential equationNonlinear systemOrdinary differential equationPhysicsMathematicsMathematical analysisDifferential equationBiologyBiophysicsCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microtubules (MTs) are protein filaments that provide structure to the cytoskeleton of cells and a platform for the movement of intracellular substances. The spatial organization of MTs is crucial for a cell's form and function. MTs interact with a class of proteins called motor proteins that can transport and position individual filaments, thus contributing to overall organization. In this paper, we study the mathematical properties of a coupled partial differential equation (PDE) model, introduced by White et al. in 2015, that describes the motor-induced organization of MTs. The model consists of a nonlinear coupling of a hyperbolic PDE for bound motor proteins, a parabolic PDE for unbound motor proteins, and a transport equation for MT dynamics. We locally smooth the motor drift velocity in the equation for bound motor proteins. The mollification is not only critical for the analysis of the model, but also adds biological realism. We then use a Banach Fixed Point argument to show local existence and uniqueness of mild solutions. We highlight the applicability of the model by showing numerical simulations that are consistent with in vitro experiments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological DynamicsSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207