MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2423962875 · doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-589-7_11

Enrichment and Characterization of Glycopeptide Epitopes from Complex Mixtures

2013· article· en· W2423962875 on OpenAlexaff
Luc Tessier, Kelly M. Fulton, Susan M. Twine

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycopeptideGlycanEpitopeComputational biologyGlycoproteinGlycosylationIdentification (biology)AntigenPeptideMass spectrometryChemistryBiologyBiochemistryImmunologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antigen posttranslational modifications, including glycosylation, are recognized by the innate and adaptive arms of the immune system. Analytical approaches, including mass spectrometry and allied techniques, have allowed advances in the enrichment and identification of glyco-antigens, particularly T-cell epitopes. Similarly, major advances have been made in the identification, isolation, and detailed characterization of prokaryotic and eukaryotic glycoproteins and glycopeptides. In particular, peptide centric approaches are now capable of enriching low level glycopeptides from highly complex peptide mixtures. Similarly, advanced mass spectrometry methods allow identification of glycopeptides, characterization of glycans, and mapping of modification sites. Herein, we describe methods developed in our laboratory for the broad study of glycopeptides and illustrate how these approaches can be exploited to further our understanding of the identity and nature of glycopeptide epitopes in various diseases or auto immune disorders.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research→French-language works237,207→