MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Blood Monocytes: Development, Heterogeneity, and Relationship with Dendritic Cells

2009· review· en· W2156013098 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cédric Auffray, Michael H. Sieweke, Frédéric Geissmann

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Immunology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune cells in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Cancer ResearchInstitut National Du Cancer
KeywordsInflammationBiologyImmunologyMonocyteHaematopoiesisBone marrowInnate immune systemMyeloidMacrophagePathogenesisCell biologyImmune systemIn vitroStem cellGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monocytes are circulating blood leukocytes that play important roles in the inflammatory response, which is essential for the innate response to pathogens. But inflammation and monocytes are also involved in the pathogenesis of inflammatory diseases, including atherosclerosis. In adult mice, monocytes originate in the bone marrow in a Csf-1R (MCSF-R, CD115)-dependent manner from a hematopoietic precursor common for monocytes and several subsets of macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs). Monocyte heterogeneity has long been recognized, but in recent years investigators have identified three functional subsets of human monocytes and two subsets of mouse monocytes that exert specific roles in homeostasis and inflammation in vivo, reminiscent of those of the previously described classically and alternatively activated macrophages. Functional characterization of monocytes is in progress in humans and rodents and will provide a better understanding of the pathophysiology of inflammation.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations1,636
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of ImmunologySame topicImmune cells in cancerFrench-language works237,207