MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966066354 · doi:10.1126/science.1250220

Screening for noise in gene expression identifies drug synergies

2014· article· en· W1966066354 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsGeneDrugGene expressionComputational biologyNoise (video)BiologyGeneticsComputer sciencePharmacologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stochastic fluctuations are inherent to gene expression and can drive cell-fate specification. We used such fluctuations to modulate reactivation of HIV from latency-a quiescent state that is a major barrier to an HIV cure. By screening a diverse library of bioactive small molecules, we identified more than 80 compounds that modulated HIV gene-expression fluctuations (i.e., "noise"), without changing mean expression. These noise-modulating compounds would be neglected in conventional screens, and yet, they synergized with conventional transcriptional activators. Noise enhancers reactivated latent cells significantly better than existing best-in-class reactivation drug combinations (and with reduced off-target cytotoxicity), whereas noise suppressors stabilized latency. Noise-modulating chemicals may provide novel probes for the physiological consequences of noise and an unexplored axis for drug discovery, allowing enhanced control over diverse cell-fate decisions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.242 · 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