MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119548481 · doi:10.15173/m.v1i38.2630

Spider Silk in Tissue Engineering

2021· article· en· W3119548481 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Meducator · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilk-based biomaterials and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpider silkSpiderSILKTissue engineeringBiologyMedicineEcologyEngineeringBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spider Silk in Tissue EngineeringThe biomedical applications of spider silk can be traced back to ancient Roman times, where silk fibre meshes were used to treat skin lesions.1 Today, spider silk is commonly used as a suturing material in eye, intraoral, and lip surgeries due to its strength and extensibility.2However, new applications for spider silk have been identified in the field of tissue engineering, with potential uses ranging from meshes and coatings to scaffolding for tissue regeneration.3These applications take advantage of spider silk's biocompatibility and high tensile strength to promote cardiac tissue regeneration, peripheral axon myelination, bone regeneration, and cartilage growth.3In this article, the latest large-scale production methods and several promising applications of spider silk are reviewed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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