Principles underlying implementation of <i>nearly</i> -homeostatic biological networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY A nearly-homeostatic biological system keeps the steady-state output (like internal body temperature) within a narrow range, regardless of different persistent levels of environmental perturbations (like external temperatures). A nearly-homeostatic system can guarantee performance of a therapeutic device in different patient contexts or can be a detector that generates a response only upon encountering an anomaly. We have developed the inverse homeostasis perspective to determine the impact of each parameter on the system’s homeostatic performance, which has allowed us to vastly widen the region of implementable parameter sets supporting near-homeostasis compared to the predominant approach of minimizing the controller’s integration leakiness. To implement nearly-homeostatic systems without measuring parameter values, we have used feedback-free auxiliary systems to accurately approximate steady-state response curves of key components of the feedback system and adjusted those curves to attain desired characteristics. Our approach has not only discovered a new mechanism of near-homeostasis, but also serves as a new framework to reinterpret whether the homeostatic performance observed in previously published systems arises from the mechanisms originally proposed to explain the behaviour.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".