MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Morphology and Properties of Astrocytes

2010· review· en· W43342070 on OpenAlexaff
Sukriti Nag

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynaptogenesisAstrocyteNeuroscienceBiologyCentral nervous system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Astrocytes were identified about 150 years ago, and, for the longest time, were considered to be supporting cells in the brain providing trophic, metabolic, and structural support for neural networks. Research in the last 2 decades has uncovered many novel molecules in astrocytes and the finding that astrocytes communicate with neurons via Ca2+ signaling, which leads to release of chemical transmitters, termed gliotransmitters, has led to renewed interest in their biology. This chapter will briefly review the unique morphology and molecular properties of astrocytes. The reader will be introduced to the role of astrocytes in blood-brain barrier (BBB) maintenance, in Ca2+ signaling, in synaptic transmission, in CNS synaptogenesis, and as neural progenitor cells. Mention is also made of the diseases in which astrocyte dysfunction has a role.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations54
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207