Inferring local molecular dynamics from the global actin network structure: A case study of 2D synthetic branching actin networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cells rely on their cytoskeleton for key processes including division and directed motility. Actin filaments are a primary constituent of the cytoskeleton. Although actin filaments can create a variety of network architectures linked to distinct cell functions, the microscale molecular interactions that give rise to these macroscale structures are not well understood. In this work, we investigate the microscale mechanisms that produce different branched actin network structures using an iterative classification approach. First, we employ a simple yet comprehensive agent-based model that produces synthetic actin networks with precise control over the microscale dynamics. Then we apply machine learning techniques to classify actin networks based on measurable network density and geometry, identifying key mechanistic processes that lead to particular branched actin network architectures. Extensive computational experiments reveal that the most accurate method uses a combination of supervised learning based on network density and unsupervised learning based on network symmetry. This framework can potentially serve as a powerful tool to discover the molecular interactions that produce the wide variety of actin network configurations associated with normal development as well as pathological conditions such as cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".