MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ly-49 Receptors and Their Functions

2004· review· en· W2079823347 on OpenAlexaff
J. Brian, Kevin P. Kane, Kerry J. Lavender

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Immunology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsHeritage Medical Research ClinicUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceptorBiologyMajor histocompatibility complexMHC class ICell biologyChemokine receptorImmunologyGeneGeneticsChemokine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ly-49 receptors are lectin-like type II transmembrane disulfide-bonded homodimers expressed on natural killer (NK) cells and some T-cell subsets. Cell-mediated cytotoxicity and release of cytokines/chemokines are functions regulated by Ly-49 recognition of class I major histocompatibility complex proteins (MHC-I) or virus-encoded MHC-like product(s). Here we examine diversity and conservation found within the Ly-49 gene family and explore the importance of polymorphism in Ly-49 receptor expression, specificity, and function. Several parallels are evident between Ly-49 receptors in rodents and killer Ig-related (KIR) receptors in humans, including receptor gene amplification and diversification, expression patterns, MHC-I specificity, shared signaling, and ultimate effects on NK-cell functions. These similarities suggest that insights gained in defining Ly-49 receptor functions in small animal models could have direct relevance to existing clinical challenges where there may be opportunities to manipulate human NK cells and KIR receptors for therapeutic benefit.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations25
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Reviews in ImmunologySame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207