MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167968600 · doi:10.1109/bibm.2008.46

Feature Selection for Tandem Mass Spectrum Quality Assessment

2008· article· en· W2167968600 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiarui Ding, Jinhong Shi, An‐Min Zou, Fang‐Xiang Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsComputer scienceSupport vector machineFeature selectionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Feature (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)Selection (genetic algorithm)TandemRelevance (law)Quality assessmentFeature vectorMachine learningData miningEvaluation methodsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the literature, hundreds of features have been proposed to assess the quality of tandem mass spectra. However, some features may be nearly irrelevant, and thus the inclusion of these nearly irrelevant features may degenerate the performance of quality assessment. This paper introduces a two-stage support vector machine recursive feature elimination (SVM-RFE) method to select the most relevant features from those found in the literature. To verify the relevance of the selected features, the classifiers with the selected features are trained and their performances are evaluated. The out performances of classifiers with the selected features illustrate that the set of selected features is more relevant to the quality of spectra than any set of features used in the literature.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207