MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073141486 · doi:10.1089/cmb.2010.0260

Pathway-Based Functional Analysis of Metagenomes

2011· article· en· W2073141486 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Itai Sharon, Sivan Bercovici, Ron Y. Pinter, Tomer Shlomi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli Foundation
KeywordsMetagenomicsComputational biologyBiologyRanking (information retrieval)Computer sciencePathway analysisGeneData scienceMachine learningGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metagenomic data enables the study of microbes and viruses through their DNA as retrieved directly from the environment in which they live. Functional analysis of metagenomes explores the abundance of gene families, pathways, and systems, rather than their taxonomy. Through such analysis, researchers are able to identify those functional capabilities most important to organisms in the examined environment. Recently, a statistical framework for the functional analysis of metagenomes was described that focuses on gene families. Here we describe two pathway level computational models for functional analysis that take into account important, yet unaddressed issues such as pathway size, gene length, and overlap in gene content among pathways. We test our models over carefully designed simulated data and propose novel approaches for performance evaluation. Our models significantly improve over the current approach with respect to pathway ranking and the computations of relative abundance of pathways in environments.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations28
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational BiologySame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207