MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151296292 · doi:10.1002/pmic.200600636

Identifying functional modules in the physical interactome of <b><i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i></b>

2007· article· en· W2151296292 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

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractomeSaccharomyces cerevisiaeTandem affinity purificationComputational biologyComputer scienceProtein–protein interactionYeastInteraction networkProcess (computing)Data miningBinary numberSaccharomycesBiologyGeneMathematicsGeneticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable information on the physical and functional interactions between the gene products is an important prerequisite for deriving meaningful system-level descriptions of cellular processes. The available information about protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been vastly increased recently by two comprehensive tandem affinity purification/mass spectrometry (TAP/MS) studies. However, using somewhat different approaches, these studies produced diverging descriptions of the yeast interactome, clearly illustrating the fact that converting the purification data into accurate sets of protein-protein interactions and complexes remains a major challenge. Here, we review the major analytical steps involved in this process, with special focus on the task of deriving complexes from the network of binary interactions. Applying the Markov Cluster procedure to an alternative yeast interaction network, recently derived by combining the data from the two latest TAP/MS studies, we produce a new description of yeast protein complexes. Several objective criteria suggest that this new description is more accurate and meaningful than those previously published. The same criteria are also used to gauge the influence that different methods for deriving binary interactions and complexes may have on the results. Lastly, it is shown that employing identical procedures to process the latest purification datasets significantly improves the convergence between the resulting interactome descriptions.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.248 · 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