MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034653671 · doi:10.1093/rpd/ncr027

Acellular comet assay: a tool for assessing variables influencing the alkaline comet assay

2011· article· en· W2034653671 on OpenAlex
Erika Kennedy, James P. McNamee, L. Prud'homme Lalonde, Thomas C. Jones, Donald Wilkinson

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation Protection Dosimetry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National DefenceHealth CanadaDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsRadiological weaponCometLibrary sciencePolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceSurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, an acellular modification to the alkaline comet assay to further evaluate key variables within the assay that may influence the outcome of genotoxicity studies is described. This acellular comet assay can detect differences of 0.2 Gy of (60)Co gamma-ray radiation between 0 and 1 Gy and differences of 1 Gy between 0 and 8 Gy; thus, this assay is applicable for a wide range of DNA damage levels. It is also shown that DNA damage from different radiation energies was not significantly different from (60)Co gamma-ray. This assay displayed a statistical increase in DNA damage due to uncontrolled exposure to natural light; however, the slope of the dose-response curve for light-exposed samples was similar to that for samples protected from light. A comparison of the alkaline comet assay with the acellular comet assay allowed for the intrinsic repair capacity of the alkaline comet assay to be quantified.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.241 · 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