MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140466892 · doi:10.1093/bib/bbt007

The Rat Genome Database 2013--data, tools and users

2013· article· en· W2140466892 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

VenueBriefings in Bioinformatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsSmiths Detection (Canada)
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsGenomicsGenomeFocus (optics)Computer scienceWorld Wide WebTranslational researchComputational biologyBiologyData scienceGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Rat Genome Database (RGD) was started >10 years ago to provide a core genomic resource for rat researchers. Currently, RGD combines genetic, genomic, pathway, phenotype and strain information with a focus on disease. RGD users are provided with access to structured and curated data from the molecular level through the organismal level. Those users access RGD from all over the world. End users are not only rat researchers but also researchers working with mouse and human data. Translational research is supported by RGD's comparative genetics/genomics data in disease portals, in GBrowse, in VCMap and on gene report pages. The impact of RGD also goes beyond the traditional biomedical researcher, as the influence of RGD reaches bioinformaticians, tool developers and curators. Import of RGD data into other publicly available databases expands the influence of RGD to a larger set of end users than those who avail themselves of the RGD website. The value of RGD continues to grow as more types of data and more tools are added, while reaching more types of end users.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.230 · 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