MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210780590 · doi:10.1111/bph.15811

Community guidelines for GPCR ligand bias: IUPHAR review 32

2022· review· en· W4210780590 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Kolb, Terry Kenakin, S P H Alexander, Marcel Bermúdez, Laura Bohn, Christian S. Breinholt, Michel Bouvier, Stephen J. Hill, Evi Kostenis, Kirill A. Martemyanov, Rick R. Neubig, H. Ongun Onaran, Sudarshan Rajagopal, Bryan L. Roth, Jana Selent, Arun K. Shukla, M. Sommer, David E. Gloriam

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Pharmacology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIH. Lundbeck A/SLundbeckfondenMinisterio de Asuntos Económicos y Transformación Digital, Gobierno de EspañaNovo NordiskNovo Nordisk FondenDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsG protein-coupled receptorPharmacologyMedicinePsychologyReceptorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.023

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 head0.233
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations222
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Pharmacology→Same topicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling→French-language works237,207→