MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992073996 · doi:10.4161/viru.21906

Strength in numbers

2012· review· en· W1992073996 on OpenAlexaff
Karina T. Simonsen, Sandra F. Gallego, Nils J. Færgeman, Birgitte H. Kallipolitis

Bibliographic record

VenueVirulence · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCaenorhabditis elegansInnate immune systemTranscriptomeModel organismImmunityOrganismNematodeHost (biology)PathogenAcquired immune systemGenomeProteomicsComputational biologyImmune systemGeneticsGeneEcologyGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For more than ten years the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans has proven to be a valuable model for studies of the host response to various bacterial and fungal pathogens. When exposed to a pathogenic organism, a clear response is elicited in the nematode, which is characterized by specific alterations on the transcriptional and translational levels. Early on, researchers took advantage of the possibility to conduct large-scale investigations of the C. elegans immune response. Multiple studies demonstrated that C. elegans does indeed mount a protective response against invading pathogens, thus rendering this small nematode a very useful and simple host model for the study of innate immunity and host-pathogen interactions. Here, we provide an overview of key aspects of innate immunity in C. elegans revealed by recent whole-genome transcriptomics and proteomics studies of the global response of C. elegans to various bacterial and fungal pathogens.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4780.456

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirulenceSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207