MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330743671 · doi:10.1021/ac200857t

Analytical Aspects of Proteomics: 2009–2010

2011· review· en· W2330743671 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zhibin Ning, Hu Zhou, Fangjun Wang, Mohamed Abu‐Farha, Daniel Figeys

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceChinaChinese academy of sciencesWeb of scienceCitationImpact factorChemistryComputer scienceMEDLINEPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVReviewNEXTAnalytical Aspects of Proteomics: 2009–2010Zhibin Ning†‡, Hu Zhou†‡§, Fangjun Wang⊥, Mohamed Abu-Farha†‡, and Daniel Figeys*†‡View Author Information† ‡ †Ottawa Institute of Systems Biology (OISB) and ‡Department of Biochemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada K1H 8M5§ Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China 201203⊥ Key Lab of Separation Sciences for Analytical Chemistry, National Chromatographic Research and Analysis Center, Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Dalian, China 116023Phone: 613-562-5800 ext 8674. Fax: 613-562-5655. E-mail: [email protected]Cite this: Anal. Chem. 2011, 83, 12, 4407–4426Publication Date (Web):April 14, 2011Publication History Published online28 April 2011Published inissue 15 June 2011https://doi.org/10.1021/ac200857tCopyright © 2011 American Chemical SocietyRIGHTS & PERMISSIONSArticle Views3458Altmetric-Citations27LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InReddit Read OnlinePDF (4 MB) Get e-AlertsSUBJECTS:Ions,Labeling,Peptides and proteins,Proteomics,Quantitative analysis Get e-Alerts

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207