MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102941013 · doi:10.1101/gr.3677206

Copy number variation: New insights in genome diversity

2006· review· en· W2102941013 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer L. Freeman, George H. Perry, Lars Feuk, Richard Redon, Steven A. McCarroll, David Altshuler, Hiroyuki Aburatani, Keith Jones, Chris Tyler‐Smith, Matthew E. Hurles, Nigel P. Carter, Stephen W. Scherer, Charles Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Genomics InstituteWellcome TrustCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario GenomicsLeukemia and Lymphoma SocietyGenome CanadaMassachusetts General HospitalBrigham and Women's HospitalHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsCopy-number variationBiologyGeneticsGenomeVariation (astronomy)Structural variationHuman genetic variationGenetic variationGenePhenotypeHuman genomeGene dosageGenomicsComputational biologyEvolutionary biologyComparative genomic hybridizationGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA copy number variation has long been associated with specific chromosomal rearrangements and genomic disorders, but its ubiquity in mammalian genomes was not fully realized until recently. Although our understanding of the extent of this variation is still developing, it seems likely that, at least in humans, copy number variants (CNVs) account for a substantial amount of genetic variation. Since many CNVs include genes that result in differential levels of gene expression, CNVs may account for a significant proportion of normal phenotypic variation. Current efforts are directed toward a more comprehensive cataloging and characterization of CNVs that will provide the basis for determining how genomic diversity impacts biological function, evolution, and common human diseases.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations870
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207