MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081208860 · doi:10.1159/000340069

Antigenic Compartmentation of the Cerebellar Cortex in an Australian Marsupial, the Tammar Wallaby <b><i>Macropus eugenii</i></b>

2012· article· en· W2081208860 on OpenAlexafffund
Hassan Marzban, Nathan Hoy, L.R. Marotte, Richard Hawkes

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Behavior and Evolution · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of New South Wales
KeywordsTammar wallabyMacropusMarsupialBiologyCerebellar cortexCerebellumAnatomyCortex (anatomy)NeuroscienceZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mammalian cerebellar cortex is apparently uniform in composition, but a complex heterogeneous pattern can be revealed by using biochemical markers such as zebrin II/aldolase C, which is expressed by a subset of Purkinje cells that form a highly reproducible array of transverse zones and parasagittal stripes. The architecture revealed by zebrin II expression is conserved among many taxa of birds and mammals. In this report zebrin II immunohistochemistry has been used in both section and whole-mount preparations to analyze the cerebellar architecture of the Australian tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). The gross appearance of the wallaby cerebellum is remarkable, with unusually elaborate cerebellar lobules with multiple sublobules and fissures. However, despite the morphological complexity, the underlying zone and stripe architecture is conserved and the typical mammalian organization is present.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain Behavior and EvolutionSame topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207