Biology of Stress Responses in Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
, 2022, a group of scientific leaders gathered virtually to discuss molecular and cellular mechanisms of responses to stress. Conditions of acute, high-intensity stress are well documented to induce a series of adaptive responses that aim to promote survival until the stress has dissipated and then guide recovery. However, high-intensity or persistent stress that goes beyond the cell's compensatory capacity are countered with resilience strategies that are not completely understood. These adaptative strategies, which are an essential component of the study of aging biology, were the theme of the meeting. Specific topics discussed included mechanisms of proteostasis, such as the unfolded protein response (UPR) and the integrated stress response (ISR), as well as mitochondrial stress and lysosomal stress responses. Attention was also given to regulatory mechanisms and associated biological processes linked to age-related conditions, such as muscle loss and regeneration, cancer, senescence, sleep quality, and degenerative disease, with a general focus on the relevance of stress responses to frailty. We summarize the concepts and potential future directions that emerged from the discussion and highlight their relevance to the study of aging and age-related chronic diseases.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".