Proteinase‐activated receptor domains and signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Given that the proteinase‐activated receptors (PARs) are activated by a “tethered ligand mechanism,” an important question to answer is: Which other extracellular domains of the receptors are involved in this novel signaling mechanism? Further, as for other G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs), it is of importance to know about the intracellular receptor domains that are involved in coupling receptor activation to signal transduction. Studies summarized in this article have singled out the importance of extracellular loop‐2 of PAR 1 and PAR 2 for tethered‐ligand signaling. In human PAR 1 , but not in PAR 2 , a short sequence in the extracellular N‐terminal domain (Q 83 to G 94 ) is also important for receptor activation. As for other GPCRs, intracellular loops 2 and 3 mediate receptor‐G‐protein coupling, and the C‐terminal sequence, with a putative “palmitoylation” site and target residues for kinase C phosphorylation, plays a role in receptor signaling and desensitization. This article provides an overview of the experiments leading to the current understanding of the PAR domains involved in signal transduction. Drug Dev. Res. 59:344–349, 2003. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".