MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118050664 · doi:10.3389/fncel.2020.628347

A Diversity of Cell Types, Subtypes and Phenotypes in the Central Nervous System: The Importance of Studying Their Complex Relationships

2020· article· en· W3118050664 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Ève Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cellular Neuroscience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceDiversity (politics)Central nervous systemPhenotypeCell typeBiologyCellGeneticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All the cell types in the central nervous system (CNS) cooperate to mediate proper development, function, and plasticity. Similarly, brain repair and neuroprotection, but also demyelination, synaptic loss and neurodegeneration, were increasingly shown to involve non-neuronal cells— both glial cells and peripheral immune cells—among the CNS parenchyma. Adding another degree of complexity, the non-neuronal cell populations are emerging as comprised of different subtypes, endowed with unique properties and functions at steady-state, and which can adopt various phenotypes upon exposure to homeostatic challenges. As a consequence, studying the multidirectional relationships between these different cell types, subtypes and phenotypes in the CNS is now required to provide insights into the mechanisms underlying physiological processes such as neuronogenesis, axon guidance,myelination, vascular formation and remodeling, regulation of neuronal activity, as well as synaptic formation, function and plasticity, and behavioral outputs, among other essential CNS functions.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.137 · 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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cellular NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207