MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154268795 · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2015.00019

Promoting Coordinated Development of Community-Based Information Standards for Modeling in Biology: The COMBINE Initiative

2015· review· en· W2154268795 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Hucka, David Nickerson, Gary D. Bader, Frank Bergmann, Jonathan Cooper, Emek Demir, Alan Garny, Martin Golebiewski, Chris J. Myers, Falk Schreiber, Dagmar Waltemath, N Re

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilMaurice Wilkins Centre for Molecular BiodiscoveryMicrosoft ResearchBundesministerium für Wirtschaft und EnergieNational Institutes of HealthNational Science FoundationInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsStandardizationInteroperabilityFacilitatorComputer scienceComputational modelModelling biological systemsResource (disambiguation)Data scienceBest practiceCommunity standardsManagement scienceKnowledge managementSystems biologyWorld Wide WebComputational biologyBiologyEngineeringArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Computational Modeling in Biology Network (COMBINE) is a consortium of groups involved in the development of open community standards and formats used in computational modeling in biology. COMBINE's aim is to act as a coordinator, facilitator, and resource for different standardization efforts whose domains of use cover related areas of the computational biology space. In this perspective article, we summarize COMBINE, its general organization, and the community standards and other efforts involved in it. Our goals are to help guide readers toward standards that may be suitable for their research activities, as well as to direct interested readers to relevant communities where they can best expect to receive assistance in how to develop interoperable computational models.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations124
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Bioengineering and BiotechnologySame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207