Amyloids and Other Abnormal Assembly Processes FASEB Summer Conference Copper Mountain, Colorado June 11-16, 2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The amyloid field has, over the past few years, experienced a rapid growth in a number of areas. The intent of this meeting was to examine the complete amyloid pathway from crystal structures to animal models and the creation of novel methods of treating these disorders. This involved bringing together different disciplines, ideas and approaches which examined amyloidogenic proteins from unique perspectives. The first keynote address was given by D. Cleveland (UC San Diego) who reviewed the aggregation pathway of superoxide dismutase (SOD) as it relates to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or Lou Gehrig's disease. This address provided insights into all aspects of the abnormal accumulation of SOD from the effects of mutations on protein folding to the recapitulation of these deposits in transgenic mice. The second keynote was delivered by J. Kelly (Scripps) who dealt with the complexities of amyloid assembly as seen from a protein folding viewpoint and addressed the question of whether or not it is possible to design specific inhibitory compounds. Using the transthyretin (TTR) model, it was demonstrated that aggregation could be monitored by techniques such as utracentrifugation and that molecules which maintained a stable native conformation were capable of reducing fibril formation. The combination of these two addresses encapsulated the overall goal of this meeting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.083 | 0.029 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".