MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016163629 · doi:10.1089/104454901753438561

Learning to Remember: Generation and Maintenance of T-Cell Memory

2001· review· en· W2016163629 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDNA and Cell Biology · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyImmune systemImmunological memoryMemory cellExtracellularIntracellularHoming (biology)ImmunologyNeuroscienceCell biologyImmunityEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immunologic memory results from a carefully coordinated interplay between cells of the immune system. In this review, we explore various aspects of the nature, generation, and maintenance of T lymphocyte-mediated immunologic memory. In light of the demonstrated heterogeneity of the memory T-cell pool, we hypothesize that subsets of memory T cells instructed to mature to distinct differentiation stages may differ, not only in functional and homing properties, but also in the conditions they require for survival, including antigen persistence and cytokine environment. Hence, according to this hypothesis, distinct memory T-cell subsets result from the nature and timing of the signals provided by the immune environment and occupy distinct niches. Intracellular and extracellular molecular mechanisms that underlie and modulate T-cell memory are discussed.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.230 · 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