ILC-You in the Thymus: A Fresh Look at Innate Lymphoid Cell Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discovery of innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) has revolutionized our understanding of innate immunity and immune cell interactions at epithelial barrier sites. Their presence and maintenance are critical for modulating immune homeostasis, responding to injury or infection, and repairing damaged tissues. To date, ILCs have been defined by a set of transcription factors, surface antigens and cytokines, and their functions resemble those of three major classes of helper T cell subsets, Th1, Th2 and Th17. Despite this, the lack of antigen-specific surface receptors and the notion that ILCs can develop in the absence of the thymic niche have clearly set them apart from the T-cell lineage and promulgated a dogma that ILCs develop directly from progenitors in the bone marrow. Interestingly however, emerging studies have challenged the BM-centric view of adult ILC development and suggest that ILCs could arise neonatally from developing T cell progenitors. In this review, we discuss ILC development in parallel to T-cell development and summarize key findings that support a T-cell-centric view of ILC ontogeny.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".