MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006379075 · doi:10.1177/1087057114534298

Rank Ordering Plate Data Facilitates Data Visualization and Normalization in High-Throughput Screening

2014· article· en· W2006379075 on OpenAlexafffund
Chand S. Mangat, Amrita Bharat, Sebastian S. Gehrke, Eric D. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueSLAS DISCOVERY · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)VisualizationComputer scienceData miningPlot (graphics)Data pointData reductionDatabase normalizationRowStatisticsAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-throughput screening (HTS) of chemical and microbial strain collections is an indispensable tool for modern chemical and systems biology; however, HTS data sets have inherent systematic and random error, which may lead to false-positive or false-negative results. Several methods of normalization of data exist; nevertheless, due to the limitations of each, no single method has been universally adopted. Here, we present a method of data visualization and normalization that is effective, intuitive, and easy to implement in a spreadsheet program. For each plate, the data are ordered by ascending values and a plot thereof yields a curve that is a signature of the plate data. Curve shape characteristics provide intuitive visualization of the frequency and strength of inhibitors, activators, and noise on the plate, allowing potentially problematic plates to be flagged. To reduce plate-to-plate variation, the data can be normalized by the mean of the middle 50% of ordered values, also called the interquartile mean (IQM) or the 50% trimmed mean of the plate. Positional effects due to bias in columns, rows, or wells can be corrected using the interquartile mean of each well position across all plates (IQMW) as a second level of normalization. We illustrate the utility of this method using data sets from biochemical and phenotypic screens.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.007

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLAS DISCOVERYSame topicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionFrench-language works237,207