Anisotropic Diffusion Model of Communication in 2D Biofilm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A biofilm is a microbial city. It consists of bacteria embedded in an extracellular polymeric substance (EPS) that functions as a protective barrier. Quorum sensing (QS) is a method of bacterial communication, where autoinducers (AIs) propagate via diffusion through the EPS and water channels within the biofilm. This diffusion process is anisotropic due to varying densities between the EPS and water channels. This study introduces a 2D anisotropic diffusion model for molecular communication (MC) within biofilms, analyzing information propagation between a point-to-point transmitter (TX) and receiver (RX) in bounded space. The channel impulse response is derived using Green’s function for concentration (GFC) and is validated with particle-based simulation (PBS). The outcomes reveal similar results for both isotropic and anisotropic diffusion when the TX is centrally located due to symmetry. However, anisotropic conditions lead to greater diffusion peaks when the TX is positioned off-center. Additionally, the propagation of AIs is inversely proportional to both overall biofilm size and diffusion coefficient values. It is hypothesized that anisotropic diffusion supports faster responses to hostile environmental changes because signals can propagate faster from the edge of the biofilm to the center.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".