MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072765451 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkm223

Update of the G2D tool for prioritization of gene candidates to inherited diseases

2007· article· en· W2072765451 on OpenAlexafffund
Carolina Perez‐Iratxeta, Peer Bork, Miguel A. Andrade‐Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOntario Genomics
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOMIM : Online Mendelian Inheritance in ManBiologyGeneGeneticsGenomeComputational biologyCandidate geneMendelian inheritanceHomology (biology)IdentifierPrioritizationIdentification (biology)PhenotypeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

G2D (genes to diseases) is a web resource for prioritizing genes as candidates for inherited diseases. It uses three algorithms based on different prioritization strategies. The input to the server is the genomic region where the user is looking for the disease-causing mutation, plus an additional piece of information depending on the algorithm used. This information can either be the disease phenotype (described as an online Mendelian inheritance in man (OMIM) identifier), one or several genes known or suspected to be associated with the disease (defined by their Entrez Gene identifiers), or a second genomic region that has been linked as well to the disease. In the latter case, the tool uses known or predicted interactions between genes in the two regions extracted from the STRING database. The output in every case is an ordered list of candidate genes in the region of interest. For the first two of the three methods, the candidate genes are first retrieved through sequence homology search, then scored accordingly to the corresponding method. This means that some of them will correspond to well-known characterized genes, and others will overlap with predicted genes, thus providing a wider analysis. G2D is publicly available at http://www.ogic.ca/projects/g2d_2/

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations72
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207