MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1567524883 · doi:10.1155/2015/504362

Systems Biology Approaches to Mining High Throughput Biological Data

2015· editorial· en· W1567524883 on OpenAlexaff
Fang‐Xiang Wu, Min Li, Jishou Ruan, Feng Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2015
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational biologyThroughputBiologyComputer scienceSystems biologyData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With advances in high throughput measurement techniques, large-scale biological data have been and will continuously be produced, for example, gene expression data, proteinprotein interaction (PPI) data, tandem mass spectra data, microRNA expression data, lncRNA expression data, and biomolecule-disease association data.Such data contain insightful information for understanding the mechanism of molecular biological systems and have proved useful in diagnosis, treatment, and drug design for genetic disorders or complex diseases.For this focus issue, we have invited the researchers to contribute original research articles which develop or improve systems biology approaches to mining high throughput biological data.With high throughput data, it is appealing to develop systems biology approaches to understand important biological processes.In the paper "Differential Expression Analysis in RNA-Seq by a Naive Bayes Classifier with Local Normalization," Y. Dou et al. developed a new tool for the identification of differentially expressed genes with RNA-Seq data, named GExposer.This tool introduced a local normalization algorithm to reduce the bias of nonrandomly positioned read depth.The Naive Bayes classifier was employed to integrate fold change, transcript length, and GCcontent to identify differentially expressed genes.Results on several independent tests showed that GExposer had better performance than other methods.In the paper "K-Profiles: A Nonlinear Clustering Method for Pattern Detection in High Dimensional Data," K. Wang et al. designed the nonlinear

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0060.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.616
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.138 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMed Research InternationalSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207