MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163587256 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr079

Automated workflows for accurate mass-based putative metabolite identification in LC/MS-derived metabolomic datasets

2011· article· en· W2163587256 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Brown, David C. Wedge, Royston Goodacre, Douglas B. Kell, Philip N. Baker, Louise C. Kenny, Mamas A. Mamas, Ludwig Neyses, Warwick B. Dunn

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological SciencesNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCancer Research UKWellcome Trust
KeywordsMetabolomicsWorkflowComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Matching (statistics)MetaboliteAnnotationSoftwareArtifact (error)Data miningFalse positive paradoxLimitingComputational biologyChemistryDatabaseArtificial intelligenceChromatographyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: The study of metabolites (metabolomics) is increasingly being applied to investigate microbial, plant, environmental and mammalian systems. One of the limiting factors is that of chemically identifying metabolites from mass spectrometric signals present in complex datasets. RESULTS: Three workflows have been developed to allow for the rapid, automated and high-throughput annotation and putative metabolite identification of electrospray LC-MS-derived metabolomic datasets. The collection of workflows are defined as PUTMEDID_LCMS and perform feature annotation, matching of accurate m/z to the accurate mass of neutral molecules and associated molecular formula and matching of the molecular formulae to a reference file of metabolites. The software is independent of the instrument and data pre-processing applied. The number of false positives is reduced by eliminating the inaccurate matching of many artifact, isotope, multiply charged and complex adduct peaks through complex interrogation of experimental data. AVAILABILITY: The workflows, standard operating procedure and further information are publicly available at http://www.mcisb.org/resources/putmedid.html. CONTACT: warwick.dunn@manchester.ac.uk.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.010

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations193
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207