MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328025114 · doi:10.1055/s-0042-1759920

Spatio-temporal mathematical model describing the interplay between biomechanics and cell kinetics during fibrotic scar formation

2023· article· en· W4328025114 on OpenAlexaff
Jieling Zhao, Seddik Hammad, Mathieu de Langlard, Pia Erdoesi, Yueni Li, Paul Van Liedekerke, Andreas Buttenschoen, Niels Grabe, Jan G. Hengstler, Matthias P. Ebert, Steven Dooley, Dirk Drasdo

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für Gastroenterologie · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver physiology and pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtracellular matrixFibrosisRegeneration (biology)HistopathologyPathologyCollagen fiberIn silicoBiophysicsCell biologyChemistryBiologyMedicineAnatomyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liver fibrosis is characterized by the accumulation of overexpressed extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins as a result of exposure of tissue to repeated damage. There are distinct patterns of fibrosis such as collagen septa (from tissue sections called “fibrotic walls”) connecting two central veins due to toxic injury. In the past decade, some computational models using either rule-based models 2D or partial differential equations of liver fibrosis to study the cellular and molecular mechanisms. Within a 3D single-cell-based model resolving tissue microarchitecture, we now incorporate the collagen fiber mechanics to address fibrosis formation. The same model approach already simulated regeneration after acute liver damage hence fibrosis formation is a further step towards a digital liver twin. The pattern-characterizing parameters in this study were obtained through image analysis of images from animal experiments that were compared to human histopathology. We explored alternative model mechanisms and parameters for a detailed in silico study of possible mechanism on the formation of characteristic fibrotic walls in liver fibrosis.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für GastroenterologieSame topicLiver physiology and pathologyFrench-language works237,207