MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126379430 · doi:10.1101/gr.124354.111

Translating cancer ‘omics’ to improved outcomes: Figure 1.

2012· article· en· W2126379430 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily A. Vucic, Kelsie L. Thu, Keith Robison, Leszek A. Rybaczyk, Raj Chari, Carlos E. Alvarez, Wan L. Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCongressionally Directed Medical Research ProgramsNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanary FoundationU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsOmicsBiologyGenomicsComputational biologyCancerAnnotationTranslational researchGenomeBioinformaticsGeneticsBiotechnologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genomics era has yielded great advances in the understanding of cancer biology. At the same time, the immense complexity of the cancer genome has been revealed, as well as a striking heterogeneity at the whole-genome (or omics) level that exists between even histologically similar tumors. The vast accrual and public availability of multi-omics databases with associated clinical annotation including tumor histology, patient response, and outcome are a rich resource that has the potential to lead to rapid translation of high-throughput omics to improved overall survival. We focus on the unique advantages of a multidimensional approach to genomic analysis in this new high-throughput omics age and discuss the implications of the changing cancer demographic to translational omics research.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.388
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations117
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207