Cell adhesion strength from cortical tension – an integration of concepts
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
Morphogenetic mechanisms such as cell movement or tissue separation depend on cell attachment and detachment processes, which involve adhesion receptors as well as the cortical cytoskeleton. The interplay between the two components is of stunning complexity. Most strikingly, the binding energy of adhesion molecules is usually too small for substantial cell-cell attachment, pointing to a main deficit in our present understanding of adhesion. In this Opinion article, I integrate recent findings and conceptual advances in the field into a coherent framework for cell adhesion. I argue that active cortical tension is best viewed as an integral part of adhesion, and propose on this basis a non-arbitrary measure of adhesion strength - the tissue surface tension of cell aggregates. This concept of adhesion integrates heterogeneous molecular inputs into a single mechanical property and simplifies the analysis of attachment-detachment processes. It draws attention to the enormous variation of adhesion strengths among tissues, whose origin and function is little understood.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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