MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308101959 · doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1010910

Viral endosymbiotic infection of protozoan parasites: How it influences the development of cutaneous leishmaniasis

2022· article· en· W4308101959 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrea Lafleur, Martin Olivier

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Pathogens · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProtozoan infectionLeishmaniasisLeishmaniaBiologyProtozoan parasiteMicrobiologyCutaneous leishmaniasisVirologyImmunologyParasite hosting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pervasiveness of viral infectious agents, capable of parasitizing living organisms all along the evolutionary spectrum, has obligated hosts to evolve defense mechanisms that control viral infection.Elucidation of host-pathogen interactions in model organisms has been fundamental to the translational understanding of human antiviral immunity.Lower organisms such as unicellular prokaryotes and eukaryotes have been shown to act as viral hosts and, in many cases, overcome infection via primitive immune mechanisms.The most widely studied example of this is the CRISPR/Cas system-a restriction mechanism in bacteria and archaea against highly specific viruses known as bacteriophages [1].This seminal discovery has led to important advances in genetic engineering and has increased interest in viruses that infect unicellular organisms, notably those that are pathogenic to humans, and has led to an emerging role of viruses in this triangular host-pathogen interaction [2].

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS PathogensSame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207