MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564652768 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot088732

Synchronization of Budding Yeast by Centrifugal Elutriation

2017· article· en· W2564652768 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

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElutriationCell cyclePopulationCellSynchronization (alternating current)Asynchronous communicationBiologyCell biologyChemistryChromatographyBiological systemMathematicsComputer scienceGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In yeast, cell size is normally tightly linked to cell cycle progression. Centrifugal elutriation is a method that fractionates cells based on the physical properties of cell size—fluid drag and buoyant density. Using a specially modified centrifuge and rotor system, cells can be physically separated into one or more cohorts of similar size and therefore cell cycle position. Small G 1 daughters are collected first, followed by successively larger cells. Elutriated populations can be analyzed immediately or can be returned to medium and permitted to synchronously progress through the cell cycle. This protocol describes two different elutriation methods. In the first, one or more fractions of synchronized cells are obtained from an asynchronous starting population, reincubated, and followed prospectively across a time series. In the second, an asynchronous starting population is separated into multiple fractions of similarly sized cells, and each cohort of similarly sized cells can be analyzed separately without further growth.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.289 · 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