MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051020903 · doi:10.1093/database/bat087

DBM-DB: the diamondback moth genome database

2014· article· en· W2051020903 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Tang, Liying Yu, Weiyi He, Guang Yang, Ke Feng, Simon W. Baxter, Shijun You, Carl J. Douglas, Minsheng You

Bibliographic record

VenueDatabase · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsMinistry of AgricultureUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaYuhan
KeywordsDiamondback mothdBmGenomeAnnotationGene AnnotationPlutellaGenomicsBiologyComputer scienceDatabaseComputational biologyGeneBioinformaticsGeneticsLarvaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The diamondback moth Genome Database (DBM-DB) is a central online repository for storing and integrating genomic data of diamondback moth (DBM), Plutella xylostella (L.). It provides comprehensive search tools and downloadable datasets for scientists to study comparative genomics, biological interpretation and gene annotation of this insect pest. DBM-DB contains assembled transcriptome datasets from multiple DBM strains and developmental stages, and the annotated genome of P. xylostella (version 2). We have also integrated publically available ESTs from NCBI and a putative gene set from a second DBM genome (KONAGbase) to enable users to compare different gene models. DBM-DB was developed with the capacity to incorporate future data resources, and will serve as a long-term and open-access database that can be conveniently used for research on the biology, distribution and evolution of DBM. This resource aims to help reduce the impact DBM has on agriculture using genomic and molecular tools. Database URL: http://iae.fafu.edu.cn/DBM/

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.024

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations69
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDatabaseSame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207