MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120396047 · doi:10.1139/o09-175

Mechanisms of the Hsp70 chaperone systemThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this special issue entitled “Canadian Society of Biochemistry, Molecular & Cellular Biology 52nd Annual Meeting — Protein Folding: Principles and Diseases” and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.

2010· review· en· W2120396047 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jason C. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsATP hydrolysisChaperone (clinical)Hsp70ATPaseCo-chaperoneBiologyBiochemistryProtein foldingAdenosine triphosphateNucleotideHeat shock proteinCell biologyAAA proteinsEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular chaperones of the Hsp70 family have diverse functions in cells. They assist the folding of newly synthesized and stress-denatured proteins, as well as the import of proteins into organelles, and the dissociation of aggregated proteins. The well-conserved Hsp70 chaperones are ATP dependent: binding and hydrolysis of ATP regulates their interactions with unfolded polypeptide substrates, and ATPase cycling is necessary for their function. All cellular functions of Hsp70 chaperones use the same mechanism of ATP-driven polypeptide binding and release. The Hsp40 co-chaperones stimulate ATP hydrolysis by Hsp70 and the type 1 Hsp40 proteins are conserved from Escherichia coli to humans. Various nucleotide exchange factors also promote the Hsp70 ATPase cycle. Recent advances have added to our understanding of the Hsp70 mechanism at a molecular level.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations205
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207