MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Herpesviruses Exploit Several Host Compartments for Envelopment

2012· review· en· W1731809180 on OpenAlex
Daniel Henaff, Kerstin Radtke, Roger Lippé

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTraffic · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiologyContext (archaeology)Compartment (ship)Herpes simplex virusViral envelopeCytomegalovirusIntracellularVirologyViral life cycleVirusHost (biology)Cell biologyHerpesviridaeViral replicationGeneticsViral disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enveloped viruses acquire their host-derived membrane at a variety of intracellular locations. Herpesviruses are complex entities that undergo several budding and fusion events during an infection. All members of this large family are believed to share a similar life cycle. However, they seemingly differ in terms of acquisition of their mature envelope. Herpes simplex virus is often believed to bud into an existing intracellular compartment, while the related cytomegalovirus may acquire its final envelope from a novel virus-induced assembly compartment. This review focuses on recent advances in the characterization of cellular compartment(s) potentially contributing to herpes virion final envelopment. It also examines the common points between seemingly distinct envelopment pathways and highlights the dynamic nature of intracellular compartments in the context of herpesvirus infections.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.197 · 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