MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920920267 · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09094-0

Retraction Note: Vibrio parahaemolyticus RhsP represents a widespread group of pro-effectors for type VI secretion systems

2019· retraction· en· W2920920267 on OpenAlexaff
Nan Jiang, Le Tang, Ruiqiang Xie, Zhi Li, Brianne J. Burkinshaw, Xiaoye Liang, Dylan Sosa, L. Aravind, Tao Dong, Dapeng Zhang, Jun Zheng

Post-publication record

OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2019
Typeretraction
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVibrio bacteria research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrio parahaemolyticusEffectorSecretionType three secretion systemMicrobiologyType (biology)Type VI secretion systemGroup (periodic table)BiologyBacteriaChemistryCell biologyVirulenceGeneticsBiochemistryGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper has been retracted.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptResearch integrity
Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0110.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.040

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Research integrity

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicVibrio bacteria research studiesCategoryResearch integrityFrench-language works237,207