On antigen‐specific signals, immune class regulation and energetics: Report <scp>III</scp> from the workshops on foundational concepts of immune regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a report from a one-week workshop held in Athens, Greece in July of 2022. The workshop aimed to identify emerging concepts relevant to the fundamentals of immune regulation and areas for future research. Theories of immune regulation emphasize the role of T cell help or co-stimulation (signal 2). The workshop participants considered how new data on the characteristics of agonist antigens, the role of the antigen receptor signals (signal 1) in driving fate decisions, the effect of energetics on immunity and a better understanding of class-control in the immune response, may impact theories of immune regulation. These ideas were discussed in the context of tumour immunology, autoimmunity, pregnancy and transplantation. Here we present the discussions as a narrative of different viewpoints to allow the reader to join the conversation. These discussions highlight the evolving understanding of the nature of specific antigen recognition and how both antigen-specific and non-specific mechanisms impact immune responses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".