Coquaternions, Metric Invariants of Biologic Systems and Malignant Transformations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different hypotheses of carcinogenesis have been proposed based on local factors and mechanisms. It is assumed that changes of the metric invariants of a biologic system (BS) determine common functional mechanisms of cancer growth. Numerous data demonstrate an existence of three invariant feedback patterns of BS: negative feedback (NFB), positive feedback (PFB) and reciprocal links (RL). These patterns algebraically represent basis elements of a Lie algebra sl(2,R) and imaginary part of coquaternion. Considering coquaternion as a model of a functional core of a BS, conditions of the system can be identified with the points of three families of hypersurfaces in R42: hyperboloids of one sheet, hyperboloids of two sheets and double-cones. Corresponding quadratic form relates entropy contributions of basis elements to the energy level of the system, so that anabolic states of the system will correspond to the points of a hyperboloid of one sheet, while catabolic conditions to the points of a hyperboloid of two sheets. Equilibrium states will lie in a double cone. Hypothetically anabolic and catabolic states dominate intermittently oscillating around the equilibrium. Deterioration of basis elements will cause domination of catabolic processes and cancer development demonstrating the tendency of the malfunctioning system to remain inside the double cone.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".