MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401247770 · doi:10.12688/f1000research.8733.1

The GenABEL Project for statistical genomics

2016· preprint· en· W2401247770 on OpenAlexaff
Lennart C. Karssen, Cornelia M. van Duijn, Yurii S. Aulchenko

Bibliographic record

VenueF1000Research · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
FundersCentre for Medical Systems BiologyNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchRussian Science FoundationRadboud UniversiteitDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean Commission
KeywordsSuiteOpen scienceSoftwareComputer scienceData scienceAgile software developmentSoftware developmentWorld Wide WebSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of free/libre open source software is usually done by a community of people with an interest in the tool. For scientific software, however, this is less often the case. Most scientific software is written by only a few authors, often a student working on a thesis. Once the paper describing the tool has been published, the tool is no longer developed further and is left to its own device. Here we describe the broad, multidisciplinary community we formed around a set of tools for statistical genomics. The GenABEL project for statistical omics actively promotes open interdisciplinary development of statistical methodology and its implementation in efficient and user-friendly software under an open source licence. The software tools developed withing the project collectively make up the GenABEL suite, which currently consists of eleven tools. The open framework of the project actively encourages involvement of the community in all stages, from formulation of methodological ideas to application of software to specific data sets. A web forum is used to channel user questions and discussions, further promoting the use of the GenABEL suite. Developer discussions take place on a dedicated mailing list, and development is further supported by robust development practices including use of public version control, code review and continuous integration. Use of this open science model attracts contributions from users and developers outside the "core team", facilitating agile statistical omics methodology development and fast dissemination.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1010.065

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.337 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations64
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF1000ResearchSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207