MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030698322 · doi:10.4103/1008-682x.145071

Re: Is PAWP the ′real′ sperm factor?

2014· letter· en· W2030698322 on OpenAlex
Richard Oko, Mahmoud Aarabi, Peter Šutovský

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

VenueAsian Journal of Andrology · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpermOocyte activationAndrologyMedicineBiologyCell biologyOocyteEmbryo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter is in response to an article written by Michail Nomikos, Karl Swann and F. Anthony Lai in the Research Highlights section of the Asian Journal of Andrology (AJA). The article is entitled, “Is PAWP the ‘real’ sperm factor?” and was written in response to our article entitled, “Sperm-derived WW domain-binding protein, PAWP, elicits calcium oscillations and oocyte activation in human and mouse,” published recently in FASEB J.1 According to the Science Editor of AJA, “Research Highlight” pieces are brief articles that are meant to report on publications from the primary literature. Along those lines, we were delighted to read an insightful comment on our FASEB article prepared for AJA by Dr. George L Gerton. In stark contrast, we found that the article by Nomikos et al. was a promotion of phospholipase C zeta (PLCζ) as the “real” sperm factor, a molecule Dr. Lai's group has been working on for over a decade. In this article we found several omissions, inaccuracies and mistakes that highlight shortcomings in the study of PLCζ which point to major criteria of a “real” sperm factor that have not yet been addressed for PLCζ.

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 categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.313
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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.259 · 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