MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019623784 · doi:10.4161/15384101.2014.965063

Quasi-programmed aging of budding yeast: a trade-off between programmed processes of cell proliferation, differentiation, stress response, survival and death defines yeast lifespan

2014· review· en· W2019623784 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

VenueCell Cycle · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyBudding yeastLongevitySaccharomyces cerevisiaeYeastNicheProgrammed cell deathCell biologyBuddingCellular AgingGeneticsEcologyApoptosisTelomereGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent findings suggest that evolutionarily distant organisms share the key features of the aging process and exhibit similar mechanisms of its modulation by certain genetic, dietary and pharmacological interventions. The scope of this review is to analyze mechanisms that in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae underlie: (1) the replicative and chronological modes of aging; (2) the convergence of these 2 modes of aging into a single aging process; (3) a programmed differentiation of aging cell communities in liquid media and on solid surfaces; and (4) longevity-defining responses of cells to some chemical compounds released to an ecosystem by other organisms populating it. Based on such analysis, we conclude that all these mechanisms are programs for upholding the long-term survival of the entire yeast population inhabiting an ecological niche; however, none of these mechanisms is a "program of aging" - i.e., a program for progressing through consecutive steps of the aging process.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.252 · 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