MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131550814 · doi:10.1002/widm.1068

Reverse engineering of gene regulatory networks from biological data

2012· article· en· W2131550814 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

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiological networkGene regulatory networkBiological dataReverse engineeringComputer scienceInferenceNetwork topologyData miningData scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputational biologyBiologyBioinformaticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reverse engineering of gene regulatory networks (GRNs) is one of the most challenging tasks in systems biology and bioinformatics. It aims at revealing network topologies and regulation relationships between components from biological data. Owing to the development of biotechnologies, various types of biological data are collected from experiments. With the availability of these data, many methods have been developed to infer GRNs. This paper firstly provides an introduction to the basic biological background and the general idea of GRN inferences. Then, different methods are surveyed from two aspects: models that those methods are based on and inference algorithms that those methods use. The advantages and disadvantages of these models and algorithms are discussed. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This article is categorized under: Algorithmic Development > Biological Data Mining

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.007
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.252 · 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