Mathematical modelling simulation data and artificial intelligence for the study of tumour-macrophage interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study explores the integration of mathematical modelling and machine learning to understand tumour-macrophage interactions in the tumour microenvironment. It details mathematical models based on biochemistry and physics for predicting tumour dynamics, highlighting the role of macrophages. Machine learning, particularly unsupervised and supervised techniques like K-means clustering, logistic regression, and support vector machines, are implemented to analyse simulation data. The thesis's integration of K-means clustering reveals distinct tumour behaviour patterns through the classification of tumour cells based on their microenvironmental interactions. This segmentation is crucial for understanding tumour heterogeneity and its implications for treatment. Additionally, the application of logistic regression provides insights into the probability of macrophage polarization states in the tumour microenvironment. This statistical model underscores the significant factors influencing macrophage behaviour and their consequent impact on tumour progression. These analytical approaches enhance the understanding of the complex dynamics within the tumour microenvironment, contributing to more effective tumour study strategies. The study presents a comprehensive analysis of tumour growth, macrophage polarization, and their impact on cancer treatment and prognosis. Ethical considerations and future directions focus on enhancing model accuracy and integrating experimental data for improved cancer diagnosis and treatment strategies. The thesis concludes with the potential of this hybrid approach in advancing cancer biology and therapeutic approaches.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".