MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471461660 · doi:10.3390/ph9030040

Functions of Cationic Host Defense Peptides in Immunity

2016· review· en· W2471461660 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceuticals · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Innate immune systemImmunityAntimicrobial peptidesAcquired immune systemHost (biology)Computational biologyImmune systemBiologyCationic polymerizationInflammationImmunologyPeptideChemistryBiochemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cationic host defense peptides are a widely distributed family of immunomodulatory molecules with antimicrobial properties. The biological functions of these peptides include the ability to influence innate and adaptive immunity for efficient resolution of infections and simultaneous modulation of inflammatory responses. This unique dual bioactivity of controlling infections and inflammation has gained substantial attention in the last three decades and consequent interest in the development of these peptide mimics as immunomodulatory therapeutic candidates. In this review, we summarize the current literature on the wide range of functions of cationic host defense peptides in the context of the mammalian immune system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.292 · 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