The invasion speed of cell migration models with realistic cell cycle time distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell proliferation is typically incorporated into stochastic mathematical models of cell migration by assuming that cell divisions occur after an exponentially distributed waiting time. Experimental observations, however, show that this assumption is often far from the real cell cycle time distribution (CCTD). Recent studies have suggested an alternative approach to modelling cell proliferation based on a multi-stage representation of the CCTD. In this paper we investigate the connection between the CCTD and the speed of the collective invasion. We first state a result for a general CCTD, which allows the computation of the invasion speed using the Laplace transform of the CCTD. We use this to deduce the range of speeds for the general case. We then focus on the more realistic case of multi-stage models, using both a stochastic agent-based model and a set of reaction-diffusion equations for the cells' average density. By studying the corresponding travelling wave solutions, we obtain an analytical expression for the speed of invasion for a general N-stage model with identical transition rates, in which case the resulting cell cycle times are Erlang distributed. We show that, for a general N-stage model, the Erlang distribution and the exponential distribution lead to the minimum and maximum invasion speed, respectively. This result allows us to determine the range of possible invasion speeds in terms of the average proliferation time for any multi-stage model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".