Using the Gibbs Function as a Measure of Human Brain Development Trends from Fetal Stage to Advanced Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose to use a Gibbs free energy function as a measure of the human brain development. We adopt this approach to the development of the human brain over the human lifespan: from a prenatal stage to advanced age. We used proteomic expression data with the Gibbs free energy to quantify human brain's protein-protein interaction networks. The data, obtained from BioGRID, comprised tissue samples from the 16 main brain areas, at different ages, of 57 post-mortem human brains. We found a consistent functional dependence of the Gibbs free energies on age for most of the areas and both sexes. A significant upward trend in the Gibbs function was found during the fetal stages, which is followed by a sharp drop at birth with a subsequent period of relative stability and a final upward trend toward advanced age. We interpret these data in terms of structure formation followed by its stabilization and eventual deterioration. Furthermore, gender data analysis has uncovered the existence of functional differences, showing male Gibbs function values lower than female at prenatal and neonatal ages, which become higher at ages 8 to 40 and finally converging at late adulthood with the corresponding female Gibbs functions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".