MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410109107 · doi:10.1098/rsob.240392

The information overload, immunology and their relationship to world health

2025· review· en· W4410109107 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter A. Bretscher

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Biology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyTuberculosisInformation overloadImmunologyImmunityPerspective (graphical)Class (philosophy)Immune systemEpistemologyMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Essential to much medical progress (for example, preventing AIDS, tuberculosis and cancer) is understanding how the class of immunity is controlled. Most envisage that pathogen- or danger-associated signals are critical. Many classical observations, particularly on the variables of immunization affecting the class of immunity generated, are paradoxical under this dominant view, and are therefore neglected. Among these is the role of antigen dose. Plausible strategies to prevent and treat AIDS, cancer and tuberculosis are based on such neglected observations. Many suggest that the information overload stultifies the canon, inhibiting progress. I illustrate here that seeking and resolving paradoxes can provide a different perspective from that of the dominant canon, opening vistas that address major issues pertinent to world health.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen BiologySame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207