MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035037267 · doi:10.1089/omi.2006.10.507

Clustering Methods for Microarray Gene Expression Data

2006· review· en· W2035037267 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOMICS A Journal of Integrative Biology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsAtlantic Cancer Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisMicroarray analysis techniquesExpression (computer science)Microarray databasesGenomicsGene chip analysisComputational biologyGene expression profilingGeneGene expressionData miningMicroarrayComputer scienceDNA microarrayBiologyBioinformaticsGeneticsGenomeArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the field of genomics, microarray technologies have become a powerful technique for simultaneously monitoring the expression patterns of thousands of genes under different sets of conditions. A main task now is to propose analytical methods to identify groups of genes that manifest similar expression patterns and are activated by similar conditions. The corresponding analysis problem is to cluster multi-condition gene expression data. The purpose of this paper is to present a general view of clustering techniques used in microarray gene expression data analysis.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.352 · 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