MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316599784 · doi:10.1242/dev.128314

Lineage specification in the mouse preimplantation embryo

2016· review· en· W2316599784 on OpenAlexafffund
Claire Chazaud, Yojiro Yamanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la RechercheCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAssociation pour la Recherche sur le Cancer
KeywordsBiologyEpiblastTotipotentMaternal to zygotic transitionEmbryoBlastomereBlastocystTranscriptomeEndodermCell biologyInner cell massGastrulationGeneticsEmbryonic stem cellZygoteComputational biologyEvolutionary biologyEmbryogenesisGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During mouse preimplantation embryo development, totipotent blastomeres generate the first three cell lineages of the embryo: trophectoderm, epiblast and primitive endoderm. In recent years, studies have shown that this process appears to be regulated by differences in cell-cell interactions, gene expression and the microenvironment of individual cells, rather than the active partitioning of maternal determinants. Precisely how these differences first emerge and how they dictate subsequent molecular and cellular behaviours are key questions in the field. As we review here, recent advances in live imaging, computational modelling and single-cell transcriptome analyses are providing new insights into these questions.

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 score0.002
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)0.0020.002

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations324
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmentSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207