Ensembl BioMarts: a hub for data retrieval across taxonomic space
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a number of years the BioMart data warehousing system has proven to be a valuable resource for scientists seeking a fast and versatile means of accessing the growing volume of genomic data provided by the Ensembl project. The launch of the Ensembl Genomes project in 2009 complemented the Ensembl project by utilizing the same visualization, interactive and programming tools to provide users with a means for accessing genome data from a further five domains: protists, bacteria, metazoa, plants and fungi. The Ensembl and Ensembl Genomes BioMarts provide a point of access to the high-quality gene annotation, variation data, functional and regulatory annotation and evolutionary relationships from genomes spanning the taxonomic space. This article aims to give a comprehensive overview of the Ensembl and Ensembl Genomes BioMarts as well as some useful examples and a description of current data content and future objectives. Database URLs: http://www.ensembl.org/biomart/martview/; http://metazoa.ensembl.org/biomart/martview/; http://plants.ensembl.org/biomart/martview/; http://protists.ensembl.org/biomart/martview/; http://fungi.ensembl.org/biomart/martview/; http://bacteria.ensembl.org/biomart/martview/.
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 | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.057 |
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".