MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004843282 · doi:10.1016/s1044-0305(02)00393-8

De novo sequencing of peptides using MALDI/TOF-TOF

2002· article· en· W2004843282 on OpenAlexaff
Alfred L. Yergey, Jens R. Coorssen, Peter S. Backlund, Paul S. Blank, Glen A. Humphrey, Joshua Zimmerberg, J. M. Campbell, Marvin L. Vestal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryComputational biologyPeptideMass spectrometryPeptide fragmentSequence (biology)BiochemistryChromatographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recently developed MALDI TOF-TOF instrument yields relatively complex but interpretable fragmentation spectra. When coupled with a straightforward sequence extension algorithm, it is possible to develop complete peptide sequences de novo from the spectra. This approach has been applied to a set of peptides derived from typtic digestion of electrophoretically separated sea urchin egg membrane proteins. When directed to proteins that have been described previously, the results were in essential agreement with those obtained by conventional data base searching approaches, with certain important exceptions. The present method detected errors in published sequences and was able to develop sequences from peptides differing in mass by one dalton (Da). These results show both the power of the present approach and the need for using de novo methods more frequently than may be otherwise appreciated.

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: Empirical · 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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations201
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society for Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207