MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1940013297 · doi:10.1002/elps.201300412

Can gel concentration gradients improve two‐dimensional DNA displays?

2013· article· en· W1940013297 on OpenAlexaff
David Sean, Yixuan E. Wang, Gary W. Slater

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragment (logic)PorosityGel electrophoresis of nucleic acidsElectrophoresisTemperature gradient gel electrophoresisGel electrophoresisDNAMaterials scienceChromatographyChemical physicsBiological systemChemistryComputer scienceAlgorithmBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The abrupt reduction in gel electrophoretic mobility that is observed when a dsDNA fragment is partially denatured has recently been predicted to exhibit a dependence upon the gel pore size. Using theoretical modeling, we demonstrate that this dependence can be exploited and used to improve the performance of 2D display of DNA. We report experimental evidence of this dependence and propose a new separation system in which a gel porosity gradient is utilized in a way analogous to temperature or denaturant gradients in traditional 2D display. Such gel porosity gradients can also be used in conjunction with denaturant gradients to improve 2D display results. We test these new ideas by modeling the fragment mobilities and computing the final fragment positions to find optimal 2D separation conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207