MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W11278350 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m007560200

A Note on multicolor bipartite Ramsey numbers for K_{2, n}.

2003· article· en· W11278350 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eduardo Sany Laber, Emerson L. Monte Carmelo

Bibliographic record

VenueArs Combinatoria · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsMathematicsBipartite graphRamsey's theoremCombinatoricsArithmeticDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 4A is the archetypal member of the DEAD box family of RNA helicases and is proposed to unwind structures in the 5'-untranslated region of mRNA to facilitate binding of the 40 S ribosomal subunit. The helicase activity of eIF4A has been further characterized with respect to substrate specificity and directionality. Results confirm that the initial rate and amplitude of duplex unwinding by eIF4A is dependent on the overall stability, rather than the length or sequence, of the duplex substrate. eIF4A helicase activity is minimally dependent on the length of the single-stranded region adjacent to the double-stranded region of the substrate. Interestingly, eIF4A is able to unwind blunt-ended duplexes. eIF4A helicase activity is also affected by substitution of 2'-OH (RNA) groups with 2'-H (DNA) or 2'-methoxyethyl groups. These observations, taken together with results from competitive inhibition experiments, suggest that eIF4A may interact directly with double-stranded RNA, and recognition of helicase substrates occurs via chemical and/or structural features of the duplex. These results allow for refinement of a previously proposed model for the mechanism of action of eIF4A helicase activity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArs CombinatoriaSame topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207