MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094051145 · doi:10.1093/gerona/57.11.b400

Designer Microarrays: From Soup To Nuts

2002· article· en· W2094051145 on OpenAlexaff
E. Wang, Chantale Lacelle, Suying Xu, Xiangdong Zhao, Ming Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of LouisvilleDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsDNA microarrayDiseaseNature versus nurtureMedicineBioinformaticsBiologyData scienceComputer scienceGeneGeneticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recognition that multigene mechanisms control the pathways determining the aging process renders gene screening a necessary skill for biogerontologists. In the past few years, this task has become much more accessible, with the advent of DNA chip technology. Most commercially available microarrays are designed with prefixed templates of genes of general interest, allowing investigators little freedom of choice in attempting to focus gene screening on a particular thematic pathway of interest. This report describes our "designer microarray" approach as a next generation of DNA chips, allowing individual investigators to engage in gene screening with a user friendly, do-it-yourself approach, from designing the probe templates to data mining. The end result is the ability to use microarrays as a platform for versatile gene discovery.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.024

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207