MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068951398 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2011-2885

Abstract 2885: The NCI-Nature Pathway Interaction Database: A comprehensive resource for cell signaling information

2011· article· en· W2068951398 on OpenAlexaff
Kira Anthony, Mhairi Skinner, Jeffrey Buchoff, Nicola McCarthy, Carl F. Schaefer, Kenneth H. Buetow

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebDatabaseXMLSQLMetadataResource (disambiguation)Information retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The NCI-Nature Pathway Interaction Database (PID, http://pid.nci.nih.gov) is a freely available collection of professionally curated and expert-reviewed signaling and regulatory pathways composed of human molecular interactions and cellular processes extracted from the primary literature. As of November 2010, the database contains 116 pathways and networks encompassing 7810 interactions, 3531 proteins, 137 small molecules, 3101 complexes, 5930 peer-reviewed publications and more than 10500 uses of evidence codes, and includes recent additions to the Notch and Wnt pathways along with the AP1 network. Created in a collaboration between the U.S. National Cancer Institute and Nature Publishing Group, the PID offers a range of tools to facilitate pathway exploration. Users can browse pathways and create network maps based on molecule or biological process queries; interactive network maps are displayed in JPG, SVG and Silverlight formats. The Batch query tool allows users to overlay molecule lists, such as those derived from microarray data, onto pathways. Users can also download a list of references used to create the pathway, pathway molecule lists, and complete database content in extensible markup language (XML) or Biological Pathways Exchange (BioPAX) Level 2 or Level 3 formats. The database is updated every month and supplemented by a concise editorial section that provides synopses of recent noteworthy papers in cell signaling and specially commissioned articles on the practical uses of other relevant Biomedical Informatics tools. Users can sign up for email alerts or RSS feeds to receive database content updates. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2885. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-2885

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207