MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047784262 · doi:10.1093/bib/bbm018

SenseLab: new developments in disseminating neuroscience information

2007· article· en· W2047784262 on OpenAlexaff
Chiquito Crasto, Luis Marenco, Nan Liu, Thomas M. Morse, Kei‐Hoi Cheung, Peter Lai, Gautam Bahl, Peter Masiar, Hugo Y. K. Lam, Ee Jean Lim, Huai Chen, P. Nadkarni, Michele Migliore, Perry L. Miller, G. M. Shepherd

Bibliographic record

VenueBriefings in Bioinformatics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institute on Drug AbuseRaymond and Beverly Sackler Institute for Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Yale UniversityYale UniversityNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNeuroinformaticsInteroperationDisseminationComputer scienceSuiteNeuroscienceGenomicsSystems neuroscienceData scienceWorld Wide WebInteroperabilityBiologyGenomeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the latest developments in neuroscience information dissemination through the SenseLab suite of databases: NeuronDB, CellPropDB, ORDB, OdorDB, OdorMapDB, ModelDB and BrainPharm. These databases include information related to: (i) neuronal membrane properties and neuronal models, and (ii) genetics, genomics, proteomics and imaging studies of the olfactory system. We describe here: the new features for each database, the evolution of SenseLab's unifying database architecture and instances of SenseLab database interoperation with other neuroscience online resources.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.015
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0180.033
Open science0.0080.014
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0890.080

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations35
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBriefings in BioinformaticsSame topicOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207