MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904548584 · doi:10.1126/sciimmunol.aat4579

Neutrophils: New insights and open questions

2018· review· en· W2904548584 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

VenueScience Immunology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicNeutrophil, Myeloperoxidase and Oxidative Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
KeywordsInnate immune systemBiologyImmune systemImmunologyAcquired immune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neutrophils are the first line of defense against bacteria and fungi and help combat parasites and viruses. They are necessary for mammalian life, and their failure to recover after myeloablation is fatal. Neutrophils are short-lived, effective killing machines. Their life span is significantly extended under infectious and inflammatory conditions. Neutrophils take their cues directly from the infectious organism, from tissue macrophages and other elements of the immune system. Here, we review how neutrophils traffic to sites of infection or tissue injury, how they trap and kill bacteria, how they shape innate and adaptive immune responses, and the pathophysiology of monogenic neutrophil disorders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient 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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.288 · 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