The power of <i>Drosophila</i> in modeling human disease mechanisms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six years ago, DMM launched a subject collection called 'Drosophila as a Disease Model'. This collection features Review-type articles and original research that highlight the power of Drosophila research in many aspects of human disease modeling. In the ensuing years, Drosophila research has further expanded to capitalize on genome editing, development of resources, and further interest in studying rare disease mechanisms. In the current issue of DMM, we again highlight the versatility, breadth, and scope of Drosophila research in human disease modeling and translational medicine. While many researchers have embraced the power of the fly, many more could still be encouraged to appreciate the strengths of Drosophila and how such research can integrate across species in a multi-pronged approach. Only when we truly acknowledge that all models contribute to our understanding of human biology, can we take advantage of the scope of current research endeavors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it