MyCompoundID: Using an Evidence-Based Metabolome Library for Metabolite Identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identification of unknown metabolites is a major challenge in metabolomics. Without the identities of the metabolites, the metabolome data generated from a biological sample cannot be readily linked with the proteomic and genomic information for studies in systems biology and medicine. We have developed a web-based metabolite identification tool ( http://www.mycompoundid.org ) that allows searching and interpreting mass spectrometry (MS) data against a newly constructed metabolome library composed of 8,021 known human endogenous metabolites and their predicted metabolic products (375,809 compounds from one metabolic reaction and 10,583,901 from two reactions). As an example, in the analysis of a simple extract of human urine or plasma and the whole human urine by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry and MS/MS, we are able to identify at least two times more metabolites in these samples than by using a standard human metabolome library. In addition, it is shown that the evidence-based metabolome library (EML) provides a much superior performance in identifying putative metabolites from a human urine sample, compared to the use of the ChemPub and KEGG libraries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".