MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156728666 · doi:10.1101/gr.5630906

Accurate and reliable high-throughput detection of copy number variation in the human genome

2006· article· en· W2156728666 on OpenAlexaff
Heike Fiegler, Richard Redon, Dan Andrews, Robert Andrews, C. Carder, Richard Clark, Oliver M. Dovey, Peter J. I. Ellis, Lars Feuk, Lisa French, Paul Hunt, Dimitrios Rafail Kalaitzopoulos, James R. Larkin, Lyndal Montgomery, George H. Perry, Bob Plumb, Keith Porter, Rachel E. Rigby, Diane Rigler, Armand Valsesia, Cordelia Langford, Sean Humphray, Stephen W. Scherer, Charles Lee, Matthew E. Hurles, Nigel P. Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsBiologyCopy-number variationHuman genomeReplicateGeneticsComputational biologyCopy number analysisGenomeRobustness (evolution)GeneStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study describes a new tool for accurate and reliable high-throughput detection of copy number variation in the human genome. We have constructed a large-insert clone DNA microarray covering the entire human genome in tiling path resolution that we have used to identify copy number variation in human populations. Crucial to this study has been the development of a robust array platform and analytic process for the automated identification of copy number variants (CNVs). The array consists of 26,574 clones covering 93.7% of euchromatic regions. Clones were selected primarily from the published "Golden Path," and mapping was confirmed by fingerprinting and BAC-end sequencing. Array performance was extensively tested by a series of validation assays. These included determining the hybridization characteristics of each individual clone on the array by chromosome-specific add-in experiments. Estimation of data reproducibility and false-positive/negative rates was carried out using self-self hybridizations, replicate experiments, and independent validations of CNVs. Based on these studies, we developed a variance-based automatic copy number detection analysis process (CNVfinder) and have demonstrated its robustness by comparison with the SW-ARRAY method.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations150
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207