MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047632587 · doi:10.1002/bies.202000039

Information Processing in Affective Disorders: Did an Ancient Peptide Regulating Intercellular Metabolism Become Co‐Opted for Noxious Stress Sensing?

2020· article· en· W3047632587 on OpenAlexaff
David A. Lovejoy, David W. Hogg

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubfamilyBiologyReceptorPeptideNeuroscienceCell biologyIntracellularBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Affective disorders arise in stressful situations from aberrant sensory information integration that affects energetic nutrient (i.e., glucose) utilization to the cognitive centers of the brain. Because energy flow is mediated by molecular signals and receptors that evolved before the first complex brains, the phylogenetically oldest signaling systems are essential in the etiology of affective disorders. The corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) peptide subfamily is a phylogenetically old metazoan peptide family and is pivotal for regulating organismal energy response associated with stress. Highly conserved, both the CRF peptide family and its receptors possess a structural relationship to the teneurins, and their receptors, latrophilins, respectively. The CRF homologous region of teneurin is defined as the "teneurin C-terminal associated peptide" (TCAP) and antagonizes CRF action, regulates mitochondrial energy production, and is anxiolytic in vivo. Here, it is postulated that TCAP represents an ancient peptide that mediates intercellular information transfer of stressful and noxious events by regulating energy utilization among neurons.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207