MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Kimdaejung Convention Center

2019· article· en· W4213241068 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungCollege of Medicine, Seoul National UniversityUniversity of California, RiversideUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of ChinaHong Kong Polytechnic UniversityKorea Institute of Science and TechnologyHarbin Institute of TechnologySeoul National UniversityChung-Ang UniversityUniversity of TorontoFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesSungkyunkwan UniversityNational Research Foundation of KoreaUniversity of SeoulKyung Hee UniversityPurdue UniversityChinese Academy of SciencesSamsungNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean CommissionKunming University of Science and TechnologyGwangju Institute of Science and TechnologySichuan University
KeywordsPopulationCancerCancer therapyFunction (biology)DiseaseDrugComputer scienceArtificial neural networkMedicineArtificial intelligencePharmacologyBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In clinical setting, a doctor still cannot quantitatively determine the efficacy/toxicity after treating a specific patient with either monotherapy or combinatorial therapy.Neural networks can relate drug-dose inputs to the patient's body response through a set of training data.Training neural networks with several hundred tests of cancer cells treated by combinatorial drugs.We discovered that the number of killed cancer cells is related to the doses through a parabolic response surface (PRS), which is governed by a quadratic algebraic equation.Note that the coefficients of the PRS equation are not constants and are function of time and many other parameters.This PRS relation also holds true for tests in animal and human bodies.Hence, the AI-PRS platform can quantitatively determine the optimal drug-dose combination for treating a specific patient or a population of patients.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1750.039

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207