MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225156942 · doi:10.1177/07487304221085455

A Phenomenological Mouse Circadian Pacemaker Model

2022· article· en· W4225156942 on OpenAlexafffund
Federico Cao, Martin R. Ralph, Adam R. Stinchcombe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Rhythms · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCircadian rhythmPhase response curveNocturnalRhythmBiological systemBiologySet (abstract data type)ChronobiologyCircadian clockComputer scienceNeuroscienceInternal medicineEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mathematical models have been used extensively in chronobiology to explore characteristics of biological clocks. In particular, for human circadian studies, the Kronauer model has been modified multiple times to describe rhythm production and responses to sensory input. This phenomenological model comprises a single set of parameters which can simulate circadian responses in humans under a variety of environmental conditions. However, corresponding models for nocturnal rodents commonly used in circadian rhythm studies are not available and may require new parameter values for different species and even strains. Moreover, due to a considerable variation in experimental data collected from mice of the same strain, within and across laboratories, a range of valid parameters is essential. This study develops a Kronauer-like model for mice by re-fitting relevant parameters to published phase response curve and period data using total least squares. Local parameter sensitivity analysis and parameter distributions determine the parameter ranges that give a near-identical model and data distribution of periods. However, the model required further parameter adjustments to match characteristics of other mouse strains, implying that the model itself detects changes in the core processes of rhythm generation and control. The model is a useful tool to understand and interpret future mouse circadian clock experiments.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological RhythmsSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207