MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144014661 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bti273

Online Predicted Human Interaction Database

2005· article· en· W2144014661 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin R. Brown, Igor Jurišica

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer applications in the biosciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrosophila melanogasterGene ontologyComputer scienceOntologyVisualizationComputational biologyArtificial intelligenceBiologyGeneGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: High-throughput experiments are being performed at an ever-increasing rate to systematically elucidate protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks for model organisms, while the complexities of higher eukaryotes have prevented these experiments for humans. RESULTS: The Online Predicted Human Interaction Database (OPHID) is a web-based database of predicted interactions between human proteins. It combines the literature-derived human PPI from BIND, HPRD and MINT, with predictions made from Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila melanogaster and Mus musculus. The 23,889 predicted interactions currently listed in OPHID are evaluated using protein domains, gene co-expression and Gene Ontology terms. OPHID can be queried using single or multiple IDs and results can be visualized using our custom graph visualization program. AVAILABILITY: Freely available to academic users at http://ophid.utoronto.ca, both in tab-delimited and PSI-MI formats. Commercial users, please contact I.J. CONTACT: juris@ai.utoronto.ca SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: http://ophid.utoronto.ca/supplInfo.pdf.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.052

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations620
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer applications in the biosciencesSame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207