Phage Therapy ‐‐ Everything Old Is New again
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 bacterial viruses (bacteriophages or phages) proved pivotal in the nascence of the disciplines of molecular biology and microbial genetics, providing important information on the central processes of the bacterial cell (DNA replication, transcription and translation) and on how DNA can be transferred from one cell to another. As a result of the pioneering genetics studies and modern genomics, it is now known that phages have contributed to the evolution of the microbial cell and to its pathogenic potential. Because of their ability to transmit genes, phages have been exploited to develop cloning vector systems. They also provide a plethora of enzymes for the modern molecular biologist. Until the introduction of antibiotics, phages were used to treat bacterial infections (with variable success). Western science is now having to re-evaluate the application of phage therapy - a therapeutic modality that never went out of vogue in Eastern Europe - because of the emergence of an alarming number of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. The present article introduces the reader to phage biology, and the benefits and pitfalls of phage therapy in humans and animals.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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