MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122172923 · doi:10.1177/1460458205058757

Current trends in publicly available genetic databases

2005· article· en· W2122172923 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Informatics Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityInstitute of Population and Public HealthUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseGenomicsDNA microarrayComputational biologyData scienceProteomicsStandardizationGenomeBioinformaticsComputer scienceBiologyMedicineGeneGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of human genetic data promises to uncover important disease targets. Genes known to cause or increase susceptibility for various diseases are being identified through analysis of genetic data, expression and metabolites. Future benefits to individuals are far-reaching, including improved gene therapy strategies, better drug development for disease treatment, pre-symptomatic disease intervention and risk susceptibility information. The rapid expansion of genetic databases has resulted in the emerging areas of genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics. The article presents a comprehensive overview of Internet databases, their trends over time and what 'omics' type they embody. With the completion of the human genome we are entering the postgenomic era. The use of microarrays and database software for genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic data for clinical assays and new diagnostic therapeutics will result in large, interlinked databases that will present unique issues of data management, standardization and information sharing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.307 · 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