MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W201509594 · doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-869-0_6

Regulatory CD4– CD8– Double Negative T Cells

2010· article· en· W201509594 on OpenAlexafffund
Edward Y. Kim, S. Juvet, Li Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Foundation
KeywordsCD8In vivoImmunologyT-cell receptorPeripheral bloodIn vitroT cellBiologyCytotoxic T cellCell biologyImmune systemGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peripheral αβTCR(+)CD3(+)CD4(-)CD8(-) NK1.1/CD56(-) double-negative (DN) Treg cells are a relatively rare subset of regulatory cells found in both humans and mice, typically comprising less than 5% of the total peripheral T-cell pool. Numerous studies have shown that DN Tregs can inhibit CD4(+) and CD8(+) T-cell responses in vitro and in vivo using a variety of model systems [Zhang et al., Nature Medicine 6:782, 2000; Young et al., Blood 100:3408, 2002; Ford et al., Experimental Medicine 196:261, 2002; Young et al., Journal of Immunology 171:134, 2003; Ford et al., European Journal of Immunology 37:2234, 2007; Zhang et al., Blood 109:4071, 2007; Fischer et al., Blood 105:2828, 2005]. This chapter describes published methods for the phenotypic identification of DN Tregs, their isolation from secondary lymphoid organs of mice or human peripheral blood, activation and expansion, and assays for their ability to suppress T-cell proliferation, induce apoptosis, and promote tolerance to allografts in vivo.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicT-cell and B-cell Immunology→French-language works237,207→