MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108319506 · doi:10.1177/1073858410385870

Radial Glia: Progenitor, Pathway, and Partner

2011· review· en· W2108319506 on OpenAlexafffund
Mari Sild, Edward S. Ruthazer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Neuroscientist · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNeuroscienceSomaProgenitor cellNeuronBiologyDendrite (mathematics)ProgenitorNeurogenesisProcess (computing)NeurogliaCell biologyCentral nervous systemStem cellComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radial glia (RG) are a glial cell type that can be found from the earliest stages of CNS development. They are clearly identifiable by their unique morphology, having a periventricular cell soma and a long process extending all the way to the opposite pial surface. Due to this striking morphology, RG have long been thought of as a transient substrate for neuron migration in the developing brain. In fact, RG cells, far from exclusively serving as a passive scaffold for cell migration, have a remarkably diverse range of critical functions in CNS development and function. These include serving as progenitors of neurons and glia both during development as well as in response to injury, helping to direct axonal and dendritic process outgrowth, and regulating synaptic development and function. RG also engage in extensive bidirectional signaling both with neurons and one another. This review describes the diversity of RG cell types in the CNS and discusses their many important activities.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations79
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe NeuroscientistSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207