Sense and Immunity: Context-Dependent Neuro-Immune Interplay
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
The sensory nervous and immune systems, historically considered autonomous, actually work in concert to promote host defense and tissue homeostasis. These systems interact with each other through a common language of cell surface G protein-coupled receptors and receptor tyrosine kinases as well as cytokines, growth factors, and neuropeptides. While this bidirectional communication is adaptive in many settings, helping protect from danger, it can also become maladaptive and contribute to disease pathophysiology. The fundamental logic of how, where, and when sensory neurons and immune cells contribute to either health or disease remains, however, unclear. Our lab and others' have begun to explore how this neuro-immune reciprocal dialog contributes to physiological and pathological immune responses and sensory disorders. The cumulative results collected so far indicate that there is an important role for nociceptors (noxious stimulus detecting sensory neurons) in driving immune responses, but that this is highly context dependent. To illustrate this concept, we present our findings in a model of airway inflammation, in which nociceptors seem to have major involvement in type 2 but not type 1 adaptive immunity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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