A Stochastic Biofilm Disruption Model Based on Quorum Sensing Mimickers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quorum sensing (QS) mimickers can be used as an effective tool to disrupt biofilms which consist of communicating bacteria and extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). In this paper, a stochastic biofilm disruption model based on the usage of QS mimickers is proposed. A chemical reaction network (CRN) involving four different states is employed to model the biological processes during the biofilm formation and its disruption via QS mimickers. In addition, a state-based stochastic simulation algorithm is proposed to simulate this CRN. The proposed model is validated by the in vitro experimental results of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm and its disruption by rosmarinic acid as the QS mimicker. Our results show that there is an uncertainty in state transitions due to the effect of the randomness in the CRN. In addition to the QS activation threshold, the presented work demonstrates that there are underlying two more thresholds for the disruption of EPS and bacteria, which provides a realistic modeling for biofilm disruption with QS mimickers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".