MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1674711333 · doi:10.1002/0471250953.bi0610s27

Using OrthoCluster for the Detection of Synteny Blocks Among Multiple Genomes

2009· article· en· W1674711333 on OpenAlexaff
Ismael A. Vergara, Nansheng Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Protocols in Bioinformatics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyntenyGenomeComputational biologyGeneBiologyUploadIdentification (biology)Computer scienceGeneticsEvolutionary biologyWorld Wide WebEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synteny blocks are composed of two or more orthologous genes conserved among species, resulting from speciation from their last common ancestor. OrthoCluster (Zeng et al., 2008) is a fast and easy-to-use program for the identification of synteny blocks among multiple genomes. It allows users to identify synteny blocks that contain different types of mismatches, and to decide whether they require conservation of gene orientation and conservation of gene order within the blocks. OrthoCluster can also be used to find duplicated blocks within genomes. Although genes and their correspondence are usually used as input for OrthoCluster, in fact, OrthoCluster can be applied using any type of markers as input as long as their relationships can be established. OrthoClusterDB provides a Web interface for running OrthoCluster with user-defined datasets and parameters, as well as for browsing and downloading precomputed synteny blocks for different groups of genomes.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.008

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Protocols in BioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207