Integration of Central and Peripheral Respiratory Chemoreflexes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A debate has raged since the discovery of central and peripheral respiratory chemoreceptors as to whether the reflexes they mediate combine in an additive (i.e., no interaction), hypoadditive or hyperadditive manner. Here we critically review pertinent literature related to O2 and CO2 sensing from the perspective of system integration and summarize many of the studies on which these seemingly opposing views are based. Despite the intensity and quality of this debate, we have yet to reach consensus, either within or between species. In reviewing this literature, we are struck by the merits of the approaches and preparations that have been brought to bear on this question. This suggests that either the nature of combination is not important to system responses, contrary to what has long been supposed, or that the nature of the combination is more malleable than previously assumed, changing depending on physiological state and/or respiratory requirement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it