MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083143220 · doi:10.1002/pmic.201100471

Strategies for membrane interaction proteomics: No mass spectrometry required

2012· review· en· W2083143220 on OpenAlex

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

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiotin and Related Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInteractomeProteomicsBimolecular fluorescence complementationMembrane proteinChemistryProtein–protein interactionMembraneMass spectrometryCell biologyCell membraneBiologyBiochemistryComputational biologyYeastChromatographyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Membrane-bound proteins are one of the most important protein types in the cell, and are involved in many major cell processes and signaling pathways. Most proteins, including those at membranes, must interact with other proteins to form complexes, which are essential for their function(s). In this review, we describe some of the major non-mass spectrometry-based methods and technologies used for the investigation of intracellular membrane protein complexes including Tango, fluorescence/bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (F/BRET), luminescence-based mammalian interactome mapping (LUMIER), protein-fragment complementation assay (PCA), and membrane yeast two-hybrid assay (MYTH). We highlight the advantages and drawbacks of these methods, describe recent studies utilizing these methods, and discuss some of the major findings in the study of membrane protein-based cell pathways.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.281 · 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