MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332466577 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150982

A Human "eFP" Browser for Generating Gene Expression Anatograms

2016· article· en· W2332466577 on OpenAlexafffund
Rohan Patel, Erin T. Hamanishi, Nicholas J. Provart

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsGene expressionGeneComputational biologyExpression (computer science)Regulation of gene expressionGene expression profilingBiologyGeneticsBioinformaticsComputer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcriptomic studies help to further our understanding of gene function. Human transcriptomic studies tend to focus on a particular subset of tissue types or a particular disease state; however, it is possible to collate into a compendium multiple studies that have been profiled using the same expression analysis platform to provide an overview of gene expression levels in many different tissues or under different conditions. In order to increase the knowledge and understanding we gain from such studies, intuitive visualization of gene expression data in such a compendium can be useful. The Human eFP ("electronic Fluorescent Pictograph") Browser presented here is a tool for intuitive visualization of large human gene expression data sets on pictographic representations of the human body as gene expression "anatograms". Pictographic representations for new data sets may be generated easily. The Human eFP Browser can also serve as a portal to other gene-specific information through link-outs to various online resources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1470.057

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207