MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117279292 · doi:10.1097/shk.0000000000001704

Toll-Like Receptors, Associated Biochemical Signaling Networks, and S100 Ligands

2020· article· en· W3117279292 on OpenAlexafffund
Sahil Gupta, James N. Tsoporis, Songhui Jia, Claúdia C. dos Santos, Thomas G. Parker, John C. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueShock · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInnate immune systemPattern recognition receptorSignal transducing adaptor proteinReceptorSignal transductionCell biologyPathogen-associated molecular patternBiologyToll-like receptorTranscription factorIntracellularFunction (biology)Immune systemImmunologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Host cells recognize molecules that signal danger using pattern recognition receptors (PRRs). Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are the most studied class of PRRs and detect pathogen-associated molecular patterns and danger-associated molecular patterns. Cellular TLR activation and signal transduction can therefore contain, combat, and clear danger by enabling appropriate gene transcription. Here, we review the expression, regulation, and function of different TLRs, with an emphasis on TLR-4, and how TLR adaptor protein binding directs intracellular signaling resulting in activation or termination of an innate immune response. Finally, we highlight the recent progress of research on the involvement of S100 proteins as ligands for TLR-4 in inflammatory disease.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueShockSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207