Dynamical Network Stability Analysis of Multiple Biological Ages Provides a Framework for Understanding the Aging Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Widespread interest in nondestructive biomarkers of aging has led to a multitude of biological ages that each proffers a "true" health-adjusted individual age. Although each measure provides salient information on the aging process, they are each univariate, in contrast to the "hallmark" and "pillar" theories of aging, which are explicitly multidimensional, multicausal, and multiscale. Fortunately, multiple biological ages can be systematically combined into a multidimensional network representation. The interaction network between these biological ages permits analysis of the multidimensional effects of aging, as well as quantification of causal influences during both natural aging and, potentially, after anti-aging intervention. The behavior of the system as a whole can then be explored using dynamical network stability analysis, which identifies new, efficient biomarkers that quantify long-term resilience scores on the timescale between measurements (years). We demonstrate this approach using a set of 8 biological ages from the longitudinal Swedish Adoption/Twin Study of Aging (SATSA). After extracting an interaction network between these biological ages, we observed that physiological age, a proxy for cardiometabolic health, serves as a central node in the network, implicating it as a key vulnerability for slow, age-related decline. We furthermore show that while the system as a whole is stable, there is a weakly stable direction along which recovery is slow-on the timescale of a human lifespan. This slow direction provides an aging biomarker, which correlates strongly with chronological age and predicts longitudinal decline in health-suggesting that it estimates an important driver of age-related changes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".