MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920987196 · doi:10.1111/imr.12731

Germinal center B cell initiation, GC maturation, and the coevolution of its stromal cell niches

2019· review· en· W2920987196 on OpenAlexafffund
Ann M. Haberman, David G. Gonzalez, Patrick Wong, Tingting Zhang, Steven M. Kerfoot

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunological Reviews · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicT-cell and B-cell Immunology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMultiple Sclerosis SocietyNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
KeywordsBiologyCoevolutionContext (archaeology)NicheGerminal centerStromal cellEcological nicheEvolutionary biologyGeneticsB cellEcologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout the developing GC response, B cell survival and fate choices made at the single cell level are dependent on signals received largely through interactions with other cells, often with cognate T cells. The type of signals that a given B cell can encounter is dictated by its location within tissue microarchitecture. The focus of this review is on the initiation and evolution of the GC response at the earliest time points. Here, we review the key factors influencing the progression of GC B cell differentiation that are both stage and context dependent. Finally, we describe the coevolution of niches within and surrounding the GC that influence the outcome of the GC response.

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)0.000
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunological ReviewsSame topicT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyFrench-language works237,207