MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066452988 · doi:10.1586/14789450.2.6.891

Emerging challenges in ligand discovery: new opportunities for chromatographic assay

2005· review· en· W2066452988 on OpenAlexaff
Ella S.M. Ng, David C. Schriemer

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Proteomics · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrug discoveryFunction (biology)Ligand (biochemistry)Computational biologySmall moleculeFalse discovery rateChromatographyData scienceChemistryComputer scienceNanotechnologyBiologyBiochemistryMaterials scienceReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ligand discovery initiatives are facing interesting challenges as ever-increasing numbers of proteins are entering screening programs. As an answer to steady pressure to improve performance in drug discovery, ligand discovery can expect to play an expanded role in generating small molecules as probes to help uncover the function of novel proteins. Chromatographic assay formats can offer new entry points into standard interaction characterization (binding and rate constants) as well as powerful, scaleable methods for compound screening. This review presents recent advancements in chromatographic assay technology, with a particular focus on frontal affinity chromatography as a platform technology for interaction analysis.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of ProteomicsSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207