HGVS Recommendations for the Description of Sequence Variants: 2016 Update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The consistent and unambiguous description of sequence variants is essential to report and exchange information on the analysis of a genome. In particular, DNA diagnostics critically depends on accurate and standardized description and sharing of the variants detected. The sequence variant nomenclature system proposed in 2000 by the Human Genome Variation Society has been widely adopted and has developed into an internationally accepted standard. The recommendations are currently commissioned through a Sequence Variant Description Working Group (SVD-WG) operating under the auspices of three international organizations: the Human Genome Variation Society (HGVS), the Human Variome Project (HVP), and the Human Genome Organization (HUGO). Requests for modifications and extensions go through the SVD-WG following a standard procedure including a community consultation step. Version numbers are assigned to the nomenclature system to allow users to specify the version used in their variant descriptions. Here, we present the current recommendations, HGVS version 15.11, and briefly summarize the changes that were made since the 2000 publication. Most focus has been on removing inconsistencies and tightening definitions allowing automatic data processing. An extensive version of the recommendations is available online, at http://www.HGVS.org/varnomen.
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 | 0.021 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.053 |
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".