MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772125201 · doi:10.3390/cells6040048

Differential Location and Distribution of Hepatic Immune Cells

2017· review· en· W2772125201 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

VenueCells · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsImmune systemHepatic stellate cellDistribution (mathematics)Differential (mechanical device)MedicineBiologyComputational biologyNeurosciencePathologyImmunologyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The liver is one of the main organs in the body, performing several metabolic and immunological functions that are indispensable to the organism. The liver is strategically positioned in the abdominal cavity between the intestine and the systemic circulation. Due to its location, the liver is continually exposed to nutritional insults, microbiota products from the intestinal tract, and to toxic substances. Hepatocytes are the major functional constituents of the hepatic lobes, and perform most of the liver's secretory and synthesizing functions, although another important cell population sustains the vitality of the organ: the hepatic immune cells. Liver immune cells play a fundamental role in host immune responses and exquisite mechanisms are necessary to govern the density and the location of the different hepatic leukocytes. Here we discuss the location of these pivotal cells within the different liver compartments, and how their frequency and tissular location can dictate the fate of liver immune responses.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.258 · 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