Fig 1.
Scheme of cancer as Go gaming.
Go gaming cancer processes: (A) Go game in an intermediate state having black—white dominance in equilibrium; (B) Ising hamiltonian and the CFG from the mentioned state; (C) over tissues, the cancer cells expansion versus the immune system behave.
Table 1.
Correspondence between cancer and immune system tactics to Go tactics.
Table 2.
Correspondence between cancer and immune system tactics to Go tactics.
Fig 2.
Comparison of the random vs. random scenario.
A) A plot of the Ising energy of all the simulations put together. B) Normalized Ising Energy of all the simulations show in A. C) The upper panels show only the simulations won by the cancer cells and the lower panel show only the simulation won by the immune system. D) Normalized Ising energy of the simulation displayed in C in the same order upper panel corresponds to simulation won by the cancer cells, and the lower panel simulation won by the immune system.
Fig 3.
Comparison of the aggressive player vs passive player scenario.
A) Plot of the Isign energy for all the simulations between GNUGo and MonteCarlo, upper panel correspond to cancer ells energy lower panel correspond to immune system energy. B) Normalized values of the simulations in the same order as A.
Fig 4.
Comparison of the aggressive player vs. good player scenario.
A) Plot of the Ising energy for all the simulations between GNUGo and SMART, upper panel corresponds to cancer cells energy lower panel correspond to immune system energy. B) Normalized values of the simulations in the same order as A.
Fig 5.
Comparison of the aggressive player vs aggressive player scenario.
Table 3.
This table shows the percentage of simulations ended in before a given number of events.
The label meaning is as follows: Strong corresponds to the GnuGo simulator, Medium correspond to the SMART simulator and the Weak correspond to the MonteCarlo simulator. IS correspond to immune system and C correspond to Cancer.