MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173357459 · doi:10.1016/j.stemcr.2015.10.011

Creating Patient-Specific Neural Cells for the In Vitro Study of Brain Disorders

2015· article· en· W2173357459 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cell Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on AgingEuropean Research CouncilSeventh Framework ProgrammeLeona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable TrustMedical Research CouncilTakeda Pharmaceuticals InternationalNational Institutes of HealthWalloon excellence in life sciences and biotechnologyFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSHarvard Stem Cell InstituteBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungWellcome TrustNew York Stem Cell FoundationBrain and Behavior Research FoundationJPB FoundationU.S. Department of DefenseSimons FoundationStanley FoundationAzrieli FoundationWellcomeNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeG. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable FoundationSpinal Muscular Atrophy FoundationMaryland Stem Cell Research FundCalifornia Institute for Regenerative Medicine
KeywordsOptimismBiologyBrain diseaseField (mathematics)Data scienceNeuroscienceDiseaseComputer sciencePsychologyPathologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a group, we met to discuss the current challenges for creating meaningful patient-specific in vitro models to study brain disorders. Although the convergence of findings between laboratories and patient cohorts provided us confidence and optimism that hiPSC-based platforms will inform future drug discovery efforts, a number of critical technical challenges remain. This opinion piece outlines our collective views on the current state of hiPSC-based disease modeling and discusses what we see to be the critical objectives that must be addressed collectively as a field.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.245 · 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