MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321795051 · doi:10.1177/11769351231154679

Cell Adaptive Fitness and Cancer Evolutionary Dynamics

2023· article· en· W4321795051 on OpenAlexaff
Youcef Derbal

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenome instabilityBiologyIn silicoEvolutionary dynamicsCancer cellContext (archaeology)Fitness landscapeComputational biologyEvolutionary biologyCancerGeneticsGeneMedicineDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genome instability of cancer cells translates into increased entropy and lower information processing capacity, leading to metabolic reprograming toward higher energy states, presumed to be aligned with a cancer growth imperative. Dubbed as the cell adaptive fitness, the proposition postulates that the coupling between cell signaling and metabolism constrains cancer evolutionary dynamics along trajectories privileged by the maintenance of metabolic sufficiency for survival. In particular, the conjecture postulates that clonal expansion becomes restricted when genetic alterations induce a sufficiently high level of disorder, that is, high entropy, in the regulatory signaling network, abrogating as a result the ability of cancer cells to successfully replicate, leading to a stage of clonal stagnation. The proposition is analyzed in the context of an in-silico model of tumor evolutionary dynamics to illustrate how cell-inherent adaptive fitness may predictably constrain clonal evolution of tumors, which would have significant implications for the design of adaptive cancer therapies.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer InformaticsSame topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207