MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412069564 · doi:10.46439/allergy.6.050

Innate lymphoid cell development

2025· article· en· W4412069564 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Khosroshahi Leila, Sadeghalvad Mona, Fumio Takei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Allergy & Infectious Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsTerry Fox Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnate lymphoid cellImmunologyInnate immune systemBiologyImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) are a heterogeneous family of lymphocytes that lack conventional antigen receptors and play roles in tissue homeostasis and immune responses. Based on their transcriptional and functional properties, ILCs are classified into three main groups: group 1 ILCs (ILC1s and NK cells), group 2 ILCs (ILC2s), and group 3 ILCs (ILC3s). The developmental origins of ILCs remain an area of active investigation. Multiple progenitor populations contribute to their differentiation, including common innate lymphoid progenitors (CILPs), ILC-restricted progenitors, and IL-18 receptor-positive progenitors. Recent studies suggest that ILCs can arise from diverse pathways beyond BM-derived progenitors, including extramedullary sites such as the fetal lung and thymus. Thymic-derived ILC2s have been identified, suggesting an alternative route of development that challenges the traditional BM-centric model. This commentary discusses the current understanding of ILC development, emphasizing the contributions of BM progenitors, tissue-resident precursors, and alternative developmental pathways. Unraveling the regulatory mechanisms governing ILC differentiation will provide critical insights into their roles in immune surveillance and tissue-specific immunity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Allergy & Infectious Diseases→Same topicImmune Cell Function and Interaction→French-language works237,207→