MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Initiation of Th2 Immunity towards Food Allergens

2018· preprint· en· W3124819468 on OpenAlexafffund
Yosef Ellenbogen, Rodrigo Jiménez‐Saiz, Paul Spill, Derek K. Chu, Susan Waserman, Manel Jordana

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersFood Allergy Canada
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Immune systemImmunologyBiologyImmune recognitionSensitizationInnate immune systemAcquired immune systemImmunityNeuroscienceAllergy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In contrast to Th1 immune responses against pathogenic viruses and bacteria, the incipient events that generate Th2 responses remain less understood. Part of the difficulty in identifying universal operating principles stems from the diversity of entities against which cellular and molecular Th2 responses are produced. Indeed, such responses are launched towards harmful macroscopic parasites and noxious substances such as venoms but also against largely innocuous allergens. This suggests that the canonical understanding about sensing and recognition applied to Th1 responses may not be translatable to Th2 responses. This review will discuss processes and signals known to occur in Th2 responses, particularly in the context of food allergy. We propose that perturbations of homeostasis at barrier sites induced by external or internal subverters that either activate the immune system or lower its threshold activation are the major requirement for allergic sensitization. Innate signals produced in the tissue under these conditions equip dendritic cells with a program that shapes an adaptive Th2 response.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis ResearchFrench-language works237,207