Systems Level Modeling of the Cell Cycle Using Budding Yeast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proteins involved in the regulation of the cell cycle are highly conserved across all eukaryotes, and so a relatively simple eukaryote such as yeast can provide insight into a variety of cell cycle perturbations including those that occur in human cancer. To date, the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has provided the largest amount of experimental and modeling data on the progression of the cell cycle, making it a logical choice for in-depth studies of this process. Moreover, the advent of methods for collection of high-throughput genome, transcriptome, and proteome data has provided a means to collect and precisely quantify simultaneous cell cycle gene transcript and protein levels, permitting modeling of the cell cycle on the systems level. With the appropriate mathematical framework and sufficient and accurate data on cell cycle components, it should be possible to create a model of the cell cycle that not only effectively describes its operation, but can also predict responses to perturbations such as variation in protein levels and responses to external stimuli including targeted inhibition by drugs. In this review, we summarize existing data on the yeast cell cycle, proteomics technologies for quantifying cell cycle proteins, and the mathematical frameworks that can integrate this data into representative and effective models. Systems level modeling of the cell cycle will require the integration of high-quality data with the appropriate mathematical framework, which can currently be attained through the combination of dynamic modeling based on proteomics data and using yeast as a model organism.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".