MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160459565 · doi:10.1186/1751-0473-1-6

The Shivplot: a graphical display for trend elucidation and exploratory analysis of microarray data

2006· article· en· W2160459565 on OpenAlexafffund
Owen Z. Woody, Robert Nadon

Bibliographic record

VenueSource Code for Biology and Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre
FundersGenome Canada
KeywordsExploratory analysisExploratory data analysisComputer scienceData scienceGraphical displayData miningComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: High-throughput systems are powerful tools for the life science research community. The complexity and volume of data from these systems, however, demand special treatment. Graphical tools are needed to evaluate many aspects of the data throughout the analysis process because plots can provide quality assessments for thousands of values simultaneously. The utility of a plot, in turn, is contingent on both its interpretability and its efficiency. RESULTS: The shivplot, a graphical technique motivated by microarrays but applicable to any replicated high-throughput data set, is described. The plot capitalizes on the strengths of three well-established plotting graphics--a boxplot, a distribution density plot, and a variability vs intensity plot--by effectively combining them into a single representation. CONCLUSION: The utility of the new display is illustrated with microarray data sets. The proposed graph, retaining all the information of its precursors, conserves space and minimizes redundancy, but also highlights features of the data that would be difficult to appreciate from the individual display components. We recommend the use of the shivplot both for exploratory data analysis and for the communication of experimental data in publications.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.018

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSource Code for Biology and MedicineSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207