MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Poxviruses and Immune Evasion

2003· review· en· W2115668602 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Immunology · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyChemokineInnate immune systemImmune systemImmunologyImmunityEvasion (ethics)InflammationGeneSignal transductionVirologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large DNA viruses defend against hostile assault executed by the host immune system by producing an array of gene products that systematically sabotage key components of the inflammatory response. Poxviruses target many of the primary mediators of innate immunity including interferons, tumor necrosis factors, interleukins, complement, and chemokines. Poxviruses also manipulate a variety of intracellular signal transduction pathways such as the apoptotic response. Many of the poxvirus genes that disrupt these pathways have been hijacked directly from the host immune system, while others have demonstrated no clear resemblance to any known host genes. Nonetheless, the immunological targets and the diversity of strategies used by poxviruses to disrupt these host pathways have provided important insights into diverse aspects of immunology, virology, and inflammation. Furthermore, because of their anti-inflammatory nature, many of these poxvirus proteins hold promise as potential therapeutic agents for acute or chronic inflammatory conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.318 · 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