Model Comparison and Assessment for Single Particle Tracking in Biological Fluids
生物流体单粒子追踪的模型比较与评估AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究生物流体中的物理随机运动;虽有时间轨迹,仍缺乏归入宏观时间序列或金融高频计量的依据。
生物流体单粒子追踪的模型比较与评估AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
State-of-the-art techniques in passive particle-tracking microscopy provide high-resolution path trajectories of diverse foreign particles in biological fluids. For particles on the order of 1 μm diameter, these paths are generally inconsistent with simple Brownian motion. Yet, despite an abundance of data confirming these findings and their wide-ranging scientific implications, stochastic modeling of the complex particle motion has received comparatively little attention. Even among posited models, there is virtually no literature on likelihood-based inference, model comparisons, and other quantitative assessments. In this article, we develop a rigorous and computationally efficient Bayesian methodology to address this gap. We analyze two of the most prevalent candidate models for 30-sec paths of 1 μm diameter tracer particles in human lung mucus: fractional Brownian motion (fBM) and a Generalized Langevin Equation (GLE) consistent with viscoelastic theory. Our model comparisons distinctly favor GLE over fBM, with the former describing the data remarkably well up to the timescales for which we have reliable information. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.