MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251575160 · doi:10.1177/117693510600200003

Tumor Growth Rate Approximation-Assisted Estimation

2006· article· en· W4251575160 on OpenAlexaff
Lihua An, S. Ejaz Ahmed, Adnan Hussein Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Informatics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStochastic processes and statistical mechanics
Canadian institutionsInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorEstimationGrowth rateStatisticsBenchmark (surveying)MathematicsComputer scienceEconometricsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From tumor to tumor, there is a great variation in the proportion of cancer cells growing and making daughter cells that ultimately metastasize. The differential growth within a single tumor, however, has not been studied extensively and this may be helpful in predicting the aggressiveness of a particular cancer type. The estimation problem of tumor growth rates from several populations is studied. The baseline growth rate estimator is based on a family of interacting particle system models which generalize the linear birth process as models of tumor growth. These interacting models incorporate the spatial structure of the tumor in such a way that growth slows down in a crowded system. Approximation-assisted estimation strategy is proposed when initial values of rates are known from the previous study. Some alternative estimators are suggested and the relative dominance picture of the proposed estimator to the benchmark estimator is investigated. An over-riding theme of this article is that the suggested estimation method extends its traditional counterpart to non-normal populations and to more realistic cases.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer InformaticsSame topicStochastic processes and statistical mechanicsFrench-language works237,207