Activation of Neutrophils by Nanoparticles
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 use of nanoparticles (NPs) has increased in the past few years in various fields, including defence, aerospace, electronics, biology, medicine, and so forth. and in applications such as diagnostic technology, bioimaging, and drug/gene delivery. Thus, human exposure to NPs and nanomaterials is unavoidable and will certainly expand in the future resulting in a growing interest in nanotoxicology, the study of toxicity of nanomaterials. A number of studies have reported the effects of NPs in respect to pulmonary inflammation by investigating in vitro activation of pulmonary cells with NPs and in vivo in a variety of models in which neutrophils appear to be the predominant leukocyte cell type in lungs and in bronchoalveolar lavages following inhalation or intratracheal instillation of NPs. Despite the fact that several studies have reported an increased number of neutrophils, the literature dealing with the direct activation of neutrophils by a given NP is poorly documented. This paper will summarize the current literature in this latter area of research and will end with a perspective view in which our laboratory will be involved in the following years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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