MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121002144 · doi:10.1002/prot.20303

Design of a data model for developing laboratory information management and analysis systems for protein production

2004· article· en· W2121002144 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Pajon, John Ionides, Jon Diprose, Joël Fillon, Rasmus H. Fogh, Alun Ashton, Helen M. Berman, Wayne Boucher, Mirosław Cygler, Emeline Deleury, Robert Esnouf, Joël Janin, Rosalind Kim, Isabelle Krimm, Catherine L. Lawson, Eric Oeuillet, Anne Poupon, S. Raymond, Tim J. Stevens, Herman van Tilbeurgh, John Westbrook, P.A. Wood, Eldon L. Ulrich, Wim Vranken, Li Xueli, Ernest D. Laue, David I. Stuart, Kim Henrick

Bibliographic record

VenueProteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBiotechnology Research Institute
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
KeywordsProduction (economics)Computer scienceSystems engineeringManufacturing engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data management has emerged as one of the central issues in the high-throughput processes of taking a protein target sequence through to a protein sample. To simplify this task, and following extensive consultation with the international structural genomics community, we describe here a model of the data related to protein production. The model is suitable for both large and small facilities for use in tracking samples, experiments, and results through the many procedures involved. The model is described in Unified Modeling Language (UML). In addition, we present relational database schemas derived from the UML. These relational schemas are already in use in a number of data management projects.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0080.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProteins Structure Function and BioinformaticsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207