Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISAs) has been used as a convenient routine immunological assay for many specific antigens to monitor antibody responses to vaccination, and has replaced other methods, e.g., radioimmunoassay (FARR assay) (1,2). For example, ELISA using tetanus toxoid, 1diphtheria toxoid, Haemophilus influenzae Type b (Hib) polysaccharide and Neisseria meningitidis A/C polysaccharide are used to determine serum antibodies following vaccination. In these assays, the antigen, e.g., toxoid (tetanus, diphtheria) or polysaccharide (Hib PRP, Men C) alone or conjugated to poly-L-lysine or methylated human serum albumin (mHSA), is coated onto plastic of 96-well microtiter plates (3-5). By direct or indirect methods the antibodies in serum samples can be detected using enzyme-linked secondary antibody conjugates, e.g., horseradish peroxidase or alkaline phosphatase, and appropriate substrates using color reaction at specific absorbance e.g., ODA405. The principle of the indirect ELISA is shown in Fig. 1. (6). Using dilutions of a standard serum or monoclonal antibody with known concentration of total/ specific antibody or given arbitrary units, it is possible to compare dilutions of unknown samples against a standard curve. In this chapter we demonstrate how to establish an ELISA for antibody to H. influenzae (Hi) inner-core lipopolysaccharide (LPS) epitopes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".