MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157673856 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu677

flowDensity: reproducing manual gating of flow cytometry data by automated density-based cell population identification

2014· article· en· W2157673856 on OpenAlexaff
Mehrnoush Malek, M. Jafar Taghiyar, Lauren C. Chong, Greg Finak, Raphaël Gottardo, Ryan R. Brinkman

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBioconductorComputer scienceBivariate analysisGatingSource codeData setIdentification (biology)PopulationData miningSet (abstract data type)Code (set theory)Artificial intelligenceProgramming languageMachine learningBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY: flowDensity facilitates reproducible, high-throughput analysis of flow cytometry data by automating a predefined manual gating approach. The algorithm is based on a sequential bivariate gating approach that generates a set of predefined cell populations. It chooses the best cut-off for individual markers using characteristics of the density distribution. The Supplementary Material is linked to the online version of the manuscript. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: R source code freely available through BioConductor (http://master.bioconductor.org/packages/devel/bioc/html/flowDensity.html.). Data available from FlowRepository.org (dataset FR-FCM-ZZBW). CONTACT: rbrinkman@bccrc.ca SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.031

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations139
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207