Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of the apoptotic process has grown exponentially since the publication of the first edition of Apoptosis Techniques and Protocols for the Neuromethods series in 1997. In this greatly updated second edition, seasoned experts describe in step-by-step detail their best state-of-the-art techniques for studying neuronal cell death. These readily reproducible methods solve a wide variety of research problems, including the detection of the key proteins involved in neuronal apoptosis (Bax protein, cytochrome-c, and caspases), the direct assessment of the role of pro-apoptotic proteins in neurons by viral infections and microinjections, and the detection of proapoptotic proteins in situ. There are also hands-on methods for the study of apoptosis mechanisms in neuronal compartments, for studying synaptosis, and for establishing gene expression profiles in neurodegenerative brain tissues by using DNA microarrays. Written by investigators who have used the techniques extensively, each protocol includes tips on avoiding pitfalls, notes on the method's advantages and disadvantages, and a critical survey of the literature. Cutting-edge and highly practical, Apoptosis Techniques and Protocols, Second Edition, offers both novice and seasoned investigators a rich panoply of the productive tools they need to unravel the molecular mechanisms of neuronal cell death
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it