Multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT): Technical overview of a profiling method optimized for the comprehensive proteomic investigation of normal and diseased heart tissue
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An optimized analytical expression profiling strategy based on gel-free multidimensional protein identification technology (MudPIT) is reported for the systematic investigation of biochemical (mal)-adaptations associated with healthy and diseased heart tissue. Enhanced shotgun proteomic detection coverage and improved biological inference is achieved by pre-fractionation of excised mouse cardiac muscle into subcellular components, with each organellar fraction investigated exhaustively using multiple repeat MudPIT analyses. Functional-enrichment, high-confidence identification, and relative quantification of hundreds of organelle- and tissue-specific proteins are achieved readily, including detection of low abundance transcriptional regulators, signaling factors, and proteins linked to cardiac disease. Important technical issues relating to data validation, including minimization of artifacts stemming from biased under-sampling and spurious false discovery, together with suggestions for further fine-tuning of sample preparation, are discussed. A framework for follow-up bioinformatic examination, pattern recognition, and data mining is also presented in the context of a stringent application of MudPIT for probing fundamental aspects of heart muscle physiology as well as the discovery of perturbations associated with heart failure.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it