MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295137708 · doi:10.1080/19490992.2015.1090669

How the SAC gets the axe: Integrating kinetochore microtubule attachments with spindle assembly checkpoint signaling

2015· review· en· W2295137708 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shivangi Agarwal, Dileep Varma

Bibliographic record

VenueBioArchitecture · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsKinetochoreSpindle checkpointAnaphaseCell biologyCytokinesisMitosisBiologyChromosome segregationMicrotubuleSpindle apparatusCell divisionGeneticsCellCell cycleChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mitosis entails the bona fide segregation of duplicated chromosomes. This process is accomplished by the attachment of kinetochores on chromosomes to microtubules (MTs) of the mitotic spindle. Once the appropriate attachment is achieved, the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) that delays the premature onset of anaphase needs to be silenced for the cell to proceed to anaphase and cytokinesis. Therefore, while it is imperative to preserve the SAC when kinetochores are unattached, it is of paramount importance that SAC components are removed post kinetochore microtubule (kMT) attachment. Precise knowledge of how kMT attachments trigger the removal of SAC components from kinetochores or how the checkpoint proteins feedback in to the attachment machinery remains elusive. This review aims to describe the recent advances that provide an insight into the interplay of molecular events that coordinate and regulate the SAC activity in response to kMT attachment during cell division.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioArchitectureSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207