The structural genomics experimental pipeline: Insights from global target lists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural genomics (SG) initiatives are currently attempting to achieve the high-throughput determination of protein structures on a genome-wide scale. Here we analyze the SG target data that have been publicly released over a period of 16 months to assess the potential of the SG initiatives. We use statistical techniques most commonly applied in epidemiology to describe the dynamics of targets through the experimental SG pipeline. There is no clear bottleneck among the key stages of cloning, expression, purification and crystallization. An SG target will progress through each of these steps with a probability of approximately 45%. Around 80% of targets with diffraction data will yield a crystal structure, and 20% of targets with HSQC spectra will yield an NMR structure. We also find the overlaps among SG targets: 61% of SG protein sequences share at least 30% sequence identity with one or more other SG targets. There is no significant difference in average structure quality among SG structures and other structures in the PDB determined by "traditional" methods, but on average SG structures are deposited to the PDB twice as quickly after X-ray data collection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".