MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116063068 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btl379

General framework for developing and evaluating database scoring algorithms using the TANDEM search engine

2006· article· en· W2116063068 on OpenAlexaff
Brendan MacLean, Jimmy K. Eng, Ronald C. Beavis, Martin McIntosh

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsComputer scienceDatabase search engineDatabaseFunction (biology)SoftwareSuiteInformation retrievalMatching (statistics)Source codeData miningOpen sourceSearch engineProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) identifies protein sequences using database search engines, at the core of which is a score that measures the similarity between peptide MS/MS spectra and a protein sequence database. The TANDEM application was developed as a freely available database search engine for the proteomics research community. To extend TANDEM as a platform for further research on developing improved database scoring methods, we modified the software to allow users to redefine the scoring function and replace the native TANDEM scoring function while leaving the remaining core application intact. Redefinition is performed at run time so multiple scoring functions are available to be selected and applied from a single search engine binary. We introduce the implementation of the pluggable scoring algorithm and also provide implementations of two TANDEM compatible scoring functions, one previously described scoring function compatible with PeptideProphet and one very simple scoring function that quantitative researchers may use to begin their development. This extension builds on the open-source TANDEM project and will facilitate research into and dissemination of novel algorithms for matching MS/MS spectra to peptide sequences. The pluggable scoring schema is also compatible with related search applications P3 and Hunter, which are part of the X! suite of database matching algorithms. The pluggable scores and the X! suite of applications are all written in C++. AVAILABILITY: Source code for the scoring functions is available from http://proteomics.fhcrc.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 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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0100.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.011

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations218
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207