Expansion of the genomics research on Atlantic salmon <i>Salmo salar </i>L. project (GRASP) microarray tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Salmonids are the most widely studied group of fish, and in the last few years, genomics technologies have begun to contribute to this rich biology. The first salmonid microarrays appeared in 2004 and since then several dozen studies have demonstrated the utility of genomic approaches. The widespread use of the genomics research on Atlantic salmon project 16 k array and greatly expanded genome resources have led to the development of an experimental 5 k oligo (70‐mer) array and a 32 k cDNA microarray in the near future. In this paper, the authors examined some of the procedures used in the development of past arrays and reexamined them in light of new genomic data available. Some preliminary control experiments of the new 5 k array were investigated that examine oligo designs based on distance from the polyA tail, the effects of mismatches and cross‐species hybridization specificity. Beneficial approaches are also identified in the development of the new 32 k cDNA array.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".