Observ-OM and Observ-TAB: Universal syntax solutions for the integration, search, and exchange of phenotype and genotype information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic and epidemiological research increasingly employs large collections of phenotypic and molecular observation data from high quality human and model organism samples. Standardization efforts have produced a few simple formats for exchange of these various data, but a lightweight and convenient data representation scheme for all data modalities does not exist, hindering successful data integration, such as assignment of mouse models to orphan diseases and phenotypic clustering for pathways. We report a unified system to integrate and compare observation data across experimental projects, disease databases, and clinical biobanks. The core object model (Observ-OM) comprises only four basic concepts to represent any kind of observation: Targets, Features, Protocols (and their Applications), and Values. An easy-to-use file format (Observ-TAB) employs Excel to represent individual and aggregate data in straightforward spreadsheets. The systems have been tested successfully on human biobank, genome-wide association studies, quantitative trait loci, model organism, and patient registry data using the MOLGENIS platform to quickly setup custom data portals. Our system will dramatically lower the barrier for future data sharing and facilitate integrated search across panels and species. All models, formats, documentation, and software are available for free and open source (LGPLv3) at http://www.observ-om.org.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".