Bibliographic record
Abstract
. This editorial introduces a very special issue of Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling which has two purposes: one is to commemorate this anniversary; the other is to acknowledge the essential contributions of George Martin to not only this discovery, but also his overall contribution to extracellular matrix biology. When in charge of the science at FibroGen, George recruited not only myself, but also individuals essential for the early successes of FibroGen, including: Mark diNicholo and Patti Segarini. These people were principally responsible for the science that resulted in the establishment of FibroGen's first two partnerships, with Taisho and Sankyo. George also raised global interest in CCN proteins by creating key relationships with academia. For example, he invited trainees/research scientists-including Richard Stratton, Xu Shi-wen and Alan Holmes from the Royal Free Hospital in London-to visit FibroGen. Moreover, he established essential collaborations with diabetes and liver fibrosis researchers, such as Roel Goldschmeding, Bruce Riser and David Brigstock, all of whom have made major contributions to CCN biology. Indeed, George's encouragement directly or indirectly led to significant developments in the early phases of research on the CCN proteins, and important publications
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".