Probing the network structure of health deficits in human aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human aging leads to the stochastic accumulation of damage. We model an aging population using a stochastic network model. Individuals are modeled as a network of interacting nodes, representing health attributes. Nodes in the network stochastically damage and repair, with rates dependent on the state of their neighbors. Damaged nodes represent health deficits. The Frailty Index (FI) assesses age-related damage as the proportion of health deficits an individual has accumulated, from a selection of attributes. Here, we use computational, information-theoretic, and mean-field approaches to show that the degree distribution and degree correlations of the underlying network are important to the model’s ability to recover the behavior of observational health data. We use different measures of damage in the network to probe the structure of the network. We find that the behavior of different classes of observational health deficits (laboratory or clinical) is similar to the behavior of nodes of low or high degree in the model, respectively. This explains how damage can propagate within the network, leading towards individual mortality.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".