Go-or-grow models in biology: a monster on a leash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Go-or-grow approaches represent a specific class of mathematical models used to describe populations where individuals either migrate or reproduce, but not both simultaneously. These models have a wide range of applications in biology and medicine, chiefly among those the modeling of brain cancer spread. The analysis of go-or-grow models has inspired new mathematics, and it is the purpose of this review to highlight interesting and challenging mathematical properties of reaction-diffusion models of the go-or-grow type. We provide a detailed review of biological and medical applications before focusing on key results concerning solution existence and uniqueness, pattern formation, critical domain size problems, and traveling waves. We present new results related to the critical domain size and traveling wave problems, and we connect these findings to the existing literature. Moreover, we demonstrate the high level of instability inherent in go-or-grow models. We argue that there is currently no accurate numerical solver for these models, and emphasize that special care must be taken when dealing with the "monster on a leash".
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".