Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past several decades, the establishment of in vitro models of pluripotency has ushered in a golden era for developmental and stem cell biology. Research in this arena has led to profound insights into the regulatory features that shape early embryonic development. Nevertheless, an integrative theory of the epigenetic principles that govern the pluripotent nucleus remains elusive. Here, we summarize the epigenetic characteristics that define the pluripotent state. We cover what is currently known about the epigenome of pluripotent stem cells and reflect on the use of embryonic stem cells as an experimental system. In addition, we highlight insights from super-resolution microscopy, which have advanced our understanding of the form and function of chromatin, particularly its role in establishing the characteristically "open chromatin" of pluripotent nuclei. Further, we discuss the rapid improvements in 3C-based methods, which have given us a means to investigate the 3D spatial organization of the pluripotent genome. This has aided the adaptation of prior notions of a "pluripotent molecular circuitry" into a more holistic model, where hotspots of co-interacting domains correspond with the accumulation of pluripotency-associated factors. Finally, we relate these earlier hypotheses to an emerging model of phase separation, which posits that a biophysical mechanism may presuppose the formation of a pluripotent-state-defining transcriptional program.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".