MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596865928 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1601629

The Importance of Dendritic Cells in Maintaining Immune Tolerance

2017· review· en· W2596865928 on OpenAlexaff
Cindy Audiger, M. Jubayer Rahman, Tae Jin Yun, Kristin V. Tarbell, Sylvie Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Clinical Research InstituteUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsImmune systemImmune tolerancePeripheral toleranceAutoimmunityImmunologyClonal deletionDendritic cellCentral toleranceImmunityBiologySelf ToleranceT cellT-cell receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immune tolerance is necessary to prevent the immune system from reacting against self, and thus to avoid the development of autoimmune diseases. In this review, we discuss key findings that position dendritic cells (DCs) as critical modulators of both thymic and peripheral immune tolerance. Although DCs are important for inducing both immunity and tolerance, increased autoimmunity associated with decreased DCs suggests their nonredundant role in tolerance induction. DC-mediated T cell immune tolerance is an active process that is influenced by genetic variants, environmental signals, as well as the nature of the specific DC subset presenting Ag to T cells. Answering the many open questions with regard to the role of DCs in immune tolerance could lead to the development of novel therapies for the prevention of autoimmune diseases.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations274
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207