Bibliographic record
Abstract
Technical innovations in the laboratory over the past ten years have greatly improved our understanding of the immunological mechanisms of transplanted organ rejection. In Transplantation Immunology: Methods and Protocols, leading experts in solid organ transplantation review the current status of the field and describe cutting-edge techniques for detecting the immune response to the allografted organ. The authors present the latest techniques for HLA typing, detecting HLA antibodies, and monitoring T-cell response, and examine more specialized methods of utilizing proteomics, laser dissection microscopy, and real-time polymerase chain reaction. The areas of tolerance induction and reprogramming of the immune system are also covered, along with a discussion of up-to-date methods of organ preservation, of today's optimal immunosuppressive drug regimens, as well as the difficulty of mimicking chronic rejection in experimental models. Introductory chapters provide a theoretical update on current practices in renal, liver, islet, and lung transplantation and on the pathways of antigen presentation and chronic rejection. State of the art and highly practical, Transplantation Immunology: Methods and Protocols illuminates for clinicians and scientists-both newcomers and experts-the new world of detecting and monitoring patients' immunological responses to solid organ transplantation
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".