MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014519657 · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-8-483

PARPs database: A LIMS systems for protein-protein interaction data mining or laboratory information management system

2007· article· en· W2014519657 on OpenAlexafffund
Arnaud Droit, Joanna M. Hunter, Michèle Rouleau, Chantal Éthier, Aude Picard-Cloutier, David Bourgais, Guy G. Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Bioinformatics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCaprion (Canada)Université LavalBausch Health (Canada)
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProteomicsProteomePipeline (software)Computer scienceDatabase search engineAnnotationComputational biologyDatabaseData managementTandem mass spectrometryBioinformaticsData miningMass spectrometryInformation retrievalChemistryBiologySearch engine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the "post-genome" era, mass spectrometry (MS) has become an important method for the analysis of proteins and the rapid advancement of this technique, in combination with other proteomics methods, results in an increasing amount of proteome data. This data must be archived and analysed using specialized bioinformatics tools. DESCRIPTION: We herein describe "PARPs database," a data analysis and management pipeline for liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) proteomics. PARPs database is a web-based tool whose features include experiment annotation, protein database searching, protein sequence management, as well as data-mining of the peptides and proteins identified. CONCLUSION: Using this pipeline, we have successfully identified several interactions of biological significance between PARP-1 and other proteins, namely RFC-1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC BioinformaticsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207