Two for tau: Automated model discovery reveals two-stage tau aggregation dynamics in Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Alzheimer’s disease is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by the presence of amyloid- β plaques and the accumulation of misfolded tau proteins and neurofibrillary tangles in the brain. A thorough understanding of the local accumulation of tau is critical to develop effective therapeutic strategies. Tau pathology has traditionally been described using reaction-diffusion models, which succeed in capturing the global spread, but fail to accurately describe the local aggregation dynamics. Current mathematical models enforce a single-peak behavior in tau aggregation, which does not align well with clinical observations. Here we identify a more accurate description of tau aggregation that reflects the complex patterns observed in patients. We propose an innovative approach that uses constitutive neural networks to autonomously discover bell-shaped aggregation functions with multiple peaks from clinical positron emission tomography (PET) data of misfolded tau protein. Our method reveals previously overlooked two-stage aggregation dynamics by uncovering a twoterm ordinary differential equation that links the local accumulation rate to the tau concentration. When trained on data from amyloid- β positive and negative subjects, the neural network clearly distinguishes between both groups and uncovers a more subtle relationship between amyloid- β and tau than previously postulated. In line with the amyloid-tau dual pathway hypothesis, our results show that the presence of toxic amyloid- β influences the accumulation of tau, particularly in the earlier disease stages. We expect that our approach to autonomously discover the accumulation dynamics of pathological proteins will improve simulations of tau dynamics in Alzheimer’s disease and provide new insights into disease progression.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".