Epigenetic and Mitochondrial Mechanisms in Aging and Longevity: A Report of a Meeting of the Longevity Consortium, Napa, California, October 25-27, 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
THE Longevity Consortium (LC) is a National Institute on Aging (NIA)-supported multi-institutional research group that has been hosting once- or twice-yearly symposia since 2001. The overall goal of the LC is to identify genes and genetic pathways important in human aging and longevity using data collected from human studies and animal models. The symposia are held to assure ongoing, open dialogue among member and nonmember scientists in an environment also intended to stimulate the development of new collaborations and lines of research. Each meeting includes progress reports from LC-supported investigators and scientific sessions involving speakers new to our symposia and, on occasion, new to the field of biological gerontology. This report summarizes the presentations and core themes presented at the Napa, California, meeting of the LC held in November 2006. In general, the research presented supports the central role of DNA maintenance, modification, and variation in longevity and aging.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".