MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240613015 · doi:10.3410/f.738410814.793583926

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Light microscopy of proteins in their ultrastructural context.

2021· dataset· en· W4240613015 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Trinkle‐Mulcahy

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institutes of HealthWellcome Trust
KeywordsContext (archaeology)UltrastructureConfocal microscopyMicroscopyFluorescence microscopeProteomeChemistryCell biologyNanotechnologyLibrary scienceBiologyMedicineFluorescencePhysicsMaterials sciencePathologyBiochemistryAnatomyComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resolving the distribution of specific proteins at the nanoscale in the ultrastructural context of the cell is a major challenge in fluorescence microscopy.We report the discovery of a new principle for an optical contrast equivalent to electron microscopy (EM) which reveals the ultrastructural context of the cells with a conventional confocal microscope.By decrowding the intracellular space through 13 to 21-fold physical expansion while simultaneously retaining the proteins, bulk (pan) labeling of the proteome resolves local protein densities and reveals the cellular nanoarchitecture by standard light microscopy.

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)0.010
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1380.154

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.344 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical LiteratureSame topicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207