InCoB2012 Conference: from biological data to knowledge to technological breakthroughs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ten years ago when Asia-Pacific Bioinformatics Network held the first International Conference on Bioinformatics (InCoB) in Bangkok its theme was North-South Networking. At that time InCoB aimed to provide biologists and bioinformatics researchers in the Asia-Pacific region a forum to meet, interact with, and disseminate knowledge about the burgeoning field of bioinformatics. Meanwhile InCoB has evolved into a major regional bioinformatics conference that attracts not only talented and established scientists from the region but increasingly also from East Asia, North America and Europe. Since 2006 InCoB yielded 114 articles in BMC Bioinformatics supplement issues that have been cited nearly 1,000 times to date. In part, these developments reflect the success of bioinformatics education and continuous efforts to integrate and utilize bioinformatics in biotechnology and biosciences in the Asia-Pacific region. A cross-section of research leading from biological data to knowledge and to technological applications, the InCoB2012 theme, is introduced in this editorial. Other highlights included sessions organized by the Pan-Asian Pacific Genome Initiative and a Machine Learning in Immunology competition. InCoB2013 is scheduled for September 18-21, 2013 at Suzhou, China.
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 | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.017 |
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".