MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407750313 · doi:10.1137/24m1629560

Dynamic Behaviors of a Periodic System with Threshold Policy-Guided Periodic and Intermittent Therapy of Tumor

2025· article· en· W4407750313 on OpenAlexaff
Biao Tang, Yanni Xiao, Jianhong Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMathematicsControl theory (sociology)Mathematical analysisComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Recent clinical studies provide strong evidence that adaptive tumor therapy is a promising threshold policy-guided periodic and intermittent treatment for prolonging treatment efficacy particularly for prostate cancer, despite the observed tumor size fluctuations in the patients. Understanding plausible patterns of tumor size fluctuations under different treatment scenarios is important to evaluate the therapy outcomes. Here we use state-of-the-art modeling and analytic frameworks of periodic switching systems and state-dependent switching systems to develop a dynamic model that mimics the adaptive therapy, and we describe dynamical behaviors of the model system with a particular focus on the patterns of periodic fluctuation. Under the threshold policy, patients may not be given therapies during the a priori treatment period. We show that this threshold-guided treatment will give rise to a new type of periodic solutions with complex structures, characterized as [Formula: see text]-periodic solutions. We examine, both theoretically and numerically, the existence, as well as the local and global stability of such periodic solutions, including the boundary periodic solutions with one vanished compartment and positive [Formula: see text]-periodic solutions. It is hoped this study also shows the great potential in developing a class of models to describe threshold-triggered periodic and intermittent control in many fields, which in turn may generate many new dynamic behaviors of nonsmooth dynamic systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Applied MathematicsSame topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207