MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984970029 · doi:10.1096/fj.06-5912hyp

Is caspase‐dependent apoptosis only cell differentiation taken to the extreme?

2006· article· en· W1984970029 on OpenAlexafffund
Lynn A. Megeney

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell death mechanisms and regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCanadian Steel Producers AssociationOttawa Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMuscular Dystrophy AssociationHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMulticellular organismApoptosisProgrammed cell deathOrganismCell biologyMechanism (biology)Cell fate determinationCellBiologyFunction (biology)CaspaseCellular differentiationModel organismGeneticsGenePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The benefits of apoptosis for a multicellular organism are obvious and fit the current dogma that the maintenance and viability of such organisms are dependent on the selective elimination of unneeded or deleterious cell types. However, self destruction at the level of the individual cell defies the most basic precepts of biology (sustaining life). If apoptosis is viewed through this construct then one question becomes paramount, i.e., why would an individual cell and its progeny develop, retain, or evolve a mechanism the sole purpose of which is to eliminate itself? In consideration of such a paradox, it is reasonable to postulate that prospective apoptotic pathways coevolved with and or were co-opted from another basic cell function(s) that did not involve the death of the cell per se. In the following article, we present the hypothesis that the conserved biochemical pathways of apoptosis are integral components of terminal cell differentiation and it is the time of engagement and activity level of these pathways that ultimately determines the choice between cell death or cell maturation.

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 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 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations108
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicCell death mechanisms and regulationFrench-language works237,207