The Human Ageing Genomic Resources: online databases and tools for biogerontologists
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
Aging is a complex, challenging phenomenon that requires multiple, interdisciplinary approaches to unravel its puzzles. To assist basic research on aging, we developed the Human Ageing Genomic Resources (HAGR). This work provides an overview of the databases and tools in HAGR and describes how the gerontology research community can employ them. Several recent changes and improvements to HAGR are also presented. The two centrepieces in HAGR are GenAge and AnAge. GenAge is a gene database featuring genes associated with aging and longevity in model organisms, a curated database of genes potentially associated with human aging, and a list of genes tested for their association with human longevity. A myriad of biological data and information is included for hundreds of genes, making GenAge a reference for research that reflects our current understanding of the genetic basis of aging. GenAge can also serve as a platform for the systems biology of aging, and tools for the visualization of protein-protein interactions are also included. AnAge is a database of aging in animals, featuring over 4000 species, primarily assembled as a resource for comparative and evolutionary studies of aging. Longevity records, developmental and reproductive traits, taxonomic information, basic metabolic characteristics, and key observations related to aging are included in AnAge. Software is also available to aid researchers in the form of Perl modules to automate numerous tasks and as an SPSS script to analyse demographic mortality data. The HAGR are available online at http://genomics.senescence.info.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it