MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1611112988 · doi:10.1039/9781849739993

Carbohydrates in Drug Design and Discovery

2015· book· en· W1611112988 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsGlycobiologyDrug discoveryData sciencePerspective (graphical)Engineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineeringChemistryBiologyBioinformaticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years there has been increasing evidence of the importance of carbohydrates and glycoconjugates in biomedical applications, and the use of synthetic ligands based on carbohydrates as drugs has received much attention. Focussing on drug discovery from key targets and placing an emphasis on the multi-disciplinary approaches necessary to challenge these issues, this book comprehensively covers the new and recent discoveries in the area of carbohydrate drug discovery. Carbohydrates in Drug Design and Discovery is split into five sections, beginning with a introduction and perspective on the current market. The book then goes on to discuss new synthetic methods in glycobiology, the use of glycobiology in chemical biology and glycobiology in drug discovery. Providing a worldwide perspective on this broad area, and providing examples of therapeutics already developed using these methods, this book provides a comprehensive introduction, discussion and update on this fast developing field for medicinal chemists and biochemists working in industry and academia.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.011

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207