Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Of the many roles that the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) must facilitate, coordinated regulation of molecule movement across the gastrointestinal is key. This coordinated regulation allows for nutrient absorption while limiting permeation of non-desired molecules and is referred to as barrier function. Barrier function of the GIT includes intrinsic, extrinsic, and immunological factors, but generally permeability assessments are conducted to evaluate the whole-animal response and most studies focus on the extrinsic components of GIT barrier function. Common approaches to evaluate GIT permeability include the use of inert external markers varying in size and their measurement in blood or urine. Methodology exists for ex vivo, in vitro, and in vivo assessment; however, only in ex vivo and in vitro methods currently allow regionally specific information. Moreover, ex vivo studies have been essential to further elucidate factors that affect permeability such as osmolality, pH, and bioactive components such as histamine and lipopolysaccharides. For ruminants, extensive microbial degradation challenges the use of fermentable substrates as markers when assessing permeability and there is interest to compartmentalize permeability by region of the GIT. Recent research using dual markers to allow for total GIT and post-ruminal permeability have highlighted that regional permeability responses may be affected by production system, environmental conditions, and dietary characteristics. Future research is needed to improve the understanding of factors that affect GIT permeability, the regions involved, and strategies to support regulation of permeability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".