Quest for Missing Proteins: Update 2015 on Chromosome-Centric Human Proteome Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes the recent activities of the Chromosome-Centric Human Proteome Project (C-HPP) consortium, which develops new technologies to identify yet-to-be annotated proteins (termed "missing proteins") in biological samples that lack sufficient experimental evidence at the protein level for confident protein identification. The C-HPP also aims to identify new protein forms that may be caused by genetic variability, post-translational modifications, and alternative splicing. Proteogenomic data integration forms the basis of the C-HPP's activities; therefore, we have summarized some of the key approaches and their roles in the project. We present new analytical technologies that improve the chemical space and lower detection limits coupled to bioinformatics tools and some publicly available resources that can be used to improve data analysis or support the development of analytical assays. Most of this paper's content has been compiled from posters, slides, and discussions presented in the series of C-HPP workshops held during 2014. All data (posters, presentations) used are available at the C-HPP Wiki (http://c-hpp.webhosting.rug.nl/) and in the Supporting Information.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".