Array data extractor (ADE): a LabVIEW program to extract and merge gene array data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Large data sets from gene expression array studies are publicly available offering information highly valuable for research across many disciplines ranging from fundamental to clinical research. Highly advanced bioinformatics tools have been made available to researchers, but a demand for user-friendly software allowing researchers to quickly extract expression information for multiple genes from multiple studies persists. FINDINGS: Here, we present a user-friendly LabVIEW program to automatically extract gene expression data for a list of genes from multiple normalized microarray datasets. Functionality was tested for 288 class A G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and expression data from 12 studies comparing normal and diseased human hearts. Results confirmed known regulation of a beta 1 adrenergic receptor and further indicate novel research targets. CONCLUSIONS: Although existing software allows for complex data analyses, the LabVIEW based program presented here, "Array Data Extractor (ADE)", provides users with a tool to retrieve meaningful information from multiple normalized gene expression datasets in a fast and easy way. Further, the graphical programming language used in LabVIEW allows applying changes to the program without the need of advanced programming knowledge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".