Mechanisms and Points of Control in the Spread of Inflammation: A Mathematical Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the mechanisms that control the body's response to inflammation is of key importance, due to its involvement in myriad medical conditions, including cancer, arthritis, Alzheimer's disease and asthma. While resolving inflammation has historically been considered a passive process, since the turn of the century the hunt for novel therapeutic interventions has begun to focus upon active manipulation of constituent mechanisms, particularly involving the roles of apoptosing neutrophils, phagocytosing macrophages and anti-inflammatory mediators. Moreover, there is growing interest in how inflammatory damage can spread spatially due to the motility of inflammatory mediators and immune cells. For example, impaired neutrophil chemotaxis is implicated in causing chronic inflammation under trauma and in ageing, while neutrophil migration is an attractive therapeutic target in ailments such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We extend an existing homogeneous model that captures interactions between inflammatory mediators, neutrophils and macrophages to incorporate spatial behaviour. Through bifurcation analysis and numerical simulation, we show that spatially inhomogeneous outcomes can present close to the switch from bistability to guaranteed resolution in the corresponding homogeneous model. Finally, we show how aberrant spatial mechanisms can play a role in the failure of inflammation to resolve and discuss our results within the broader context of seeking novel inflammatory treatments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".