Beyond Repair Foci: Subnuclear Domains and the Cellular Response to DNA Damage
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the mid to late 1990s several groups identified DNA damage-dependent focal accumulations in nuclei of both DNA repair factors and the phosphorylated form of the histone variant H2A.X. The term "repair foci" has since been used to describe these protein accumulations. As a molecular marker for DNA damage, they have been immensely useful in the study of signal transduction pathways triggered by DNA damage while aiding in the identification of new factors involved in DNA repair. In spite of their importance, many other changes in the nuclear landscape correlate with DNA damage and repair processes. These include dramatic changes in chromatin ultrastructure and epigenetic modifications, which occur at the site of DNA breaks as well as globally throughout the nucleus. Besides chromatin, DNA damage also affects the dynamic behaviour, morphology and biochemical composition of various subnuclear domains, including the nucleolus, promyelocytic leukemia (PML) nuclear bodies and Cajal bodies. These changes in the nuclear landscape, the topic of this review, appear to be intimately linked to the cellular response to DNA damage and may prove as useful as repair foci in elucidating mechanisms of DNA repair.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it