Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent discoveries have shown that lipoxin A4 (LXA4) and lipoxin B4 (LXB4) in astrocyte conditioned media that conferred neuroprotection in vivo and in vitro. LXB4 is of interest, as it shows higher potency and protection against glutamatergic stressors compared to LXA4. However, LXB4 binding targets and its downstream mechanisms are unclear. I hypothesized that LXB4 binds to distinct receptors from LXA4 to elicit its unique neuroprotective activities. I established an in vitro screening model of neuronal degeneration to evaluate LXB4 analog bioactivities, which were used as probes to investigate LXB4 binding partners through pulldown studies and receptor binding assays. In follow up work I discovered that LXB4 binds to Ctnna1 and Spt6, and that physical interaction of both targets are linked to its neuroprotection. Together, these findings reveal undiscovered LXB4 binding targets linked to neuroprotection, allowing future studies to investigate the downstream signaling involved in this activity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".