Integrated interactions database: tissue-specific view of the human and model organism interactomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IID (Integrated Interactions Database) is the first database providing tissue-specific protein-protein interactions (PPIs) for model organisms and human. IID covers six species (S. cerevisiae (yeast), C. elegans (worm), D. melonogaster (fly), R. norvegicus (rat), M. musculus (mouse) and H. sapiens (human)) and up to 30 tissues per species. Users query IID by providing a set of proteins or PPIs from any of these organisms, and specifying species and tissues where IID should search for interactions. If query proteins are not from the selected species, IID enables searches across species and tissues automatically by using their orthologs; for example, retrieving interactions in a given tissue, conserved in human and mouse. Interaction data in IID comprises three types of PPI networks: experimentally detected PPIs from major databases, orthologous PPIs and high-confidence computationally predicted PPIs. Interactions are assigned to tissues where their proteins pairs or encoding genes are expressed. IID is a major replacement of the I2D interaction database, with larger PPI networks (a total of 1,566,043 PPIs among 68,831 proteins), tissue annotations for interactions, and new query, analysis and data visualization capabilities. IID is available at http://ophid.utoronto.ca/iid.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.028 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".