Bibliographic record
Abstract
A pancreatic extract which was successful in lowering glucose in diabetes was developed and commercialized with leadership from the University of Toronto in 1921-1922.The active principle remained unknown, though it was assumed to be the 'insulin' (or 'isletin' or 'insuline') identified microscopically in the islets of Langerhans from work in the previous 50 years.Within four years the active principle was crystallized by Abel and co-workers, and convincing proof given that it was a peptide.Determining the amino acid sequence of this relatively small protein proved a 30-year task for science, due to the confounding effects of two short chains united by di-sulphide bridges.Even then it was a mystery how the sequence related to insulin activity.That remained the case when the early X-ray diffraction work in the 1930s by Crowfoot (Hodgkin) matured in 1969 with the determination of the 3-dimensional structure of the insulin hexamer.Meanwhile 25 years of work, much in industry, invented useful extended-acting insulin preparations and, over an even longer time course, insulin preparations of high enough purity to be non-immunogenic in clinical practice.In the 1960s and 1970s work on radioimmunoassay and on glucose clamps provided tools that would prove critical to the further development of insulin as a medication over its second 50 years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".