MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2953091279 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1811.10523

Numerical parameter space compression and its application to microtubule dynamic instability

2018· preprint· en· W2953091279 on OpenAlexaff
Chieh-Ting Hsu, Gary J. Brouhard, Paul François

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrotubuleParameter spaceInstabilityTaperingComputer scienceCompression (physics)Statistical physicsSpace (punctuation)Computational modelAlgorithmPhysicsBiological systemMathematicsMechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Physical models of biological systems can become difficult to interpret when they have a large number of parameters. But the models themselves actually depend on (i.e. are sensitive to) only a subset of those parameters. Rigorously identifying this subset of "stiff" parameters has been made possible by the development of parameter space compression (PSC). However, PSC has only been applied to analytically-solvable physical models. We have generalized this powerful method by developing a numerical approach to PSC that can be applied to any computational model. We validated our method against analytically-solvable models of random walk with drift and protein production and degradation. We then applied our method to an active area of biophysics research, namely to a simple computational model of microtubule dynamic instability. Such models have become increasingly complex, perhaps unnecessarily. By adding two new parameters that account for prominent structural features of microtubules, we identify one that can be "compressed away" (the "seam" in the microtubule) and another that is essential to model performance (the "tapering" of microtubule ends). Furthermore, we show that the microtubule model has an underlying, low-dimensional structure that explains the vast majority of our experimental data. We argue that numerical PSC can identify the low-dimensional structure of any computational model in biophysics. The low-dimensional structure of a model is easier to interpret and identifies the mechanisms and experiments that best characterize the system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics→French-language works237,207→