MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130706354 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bth092

TANDEM: matching proteins with tandem mass spectra

2004· article· en· W2130706354 on OpenAlexafffund
Robertson Craig, Ronald C. Beavis

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Chicago
KeywordsTandemMatching (statistics)Tandem repeatTandem mass spectrometryComputer scienceComputational biologyChemistryBiologyGeneticsMass spectrometryChromatographyMathematicsGenomeStatisticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY: Tandem mass spectra obtained from fragmenting peptide ions contain some peptide sequence specific information, but often there is not enough information to sequence the original peptide completely. Several proprietary software applications have been developed to attempt to match the spectra with a list of protein sequences that may contain the sequence of the peptide. The application TANDEM was written to provide the proteomics research community with a set of components that can be used to test new methods and algorithms for performing this type of sequence-to-data matching. AVAILABILITY: The source code and binaries for this software are available at http://www.proteome.ca/opensource.html, for Windows, Linux and Macintosh OSX. The source code is made available under the Artistic License, from the authors.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.025

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2,606
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207