MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551432253 · doi:10.1093/bib/bbw134

Top considerations for creating bioinformatics software documentation

2016· article· en· W2551432253 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehran Karimzadeh, Michael M. Hoffman

Bibliographic record

VenueBriefings in Bioinformatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceMcLaughlin Centre, University of TorontoUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPrincess Margaret Cancer Foundation
KeywordsDocumentationComputer scienceSoftwareSoftware engineeringFeature (linguistics)Interface (matter)Software documentationWork (physics)Data scienceWorld Wide WebSoftware developmentSoftware constructionEngineeringProgramming languageOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Investing in documenting your bioinformatics software well can increase its impact and save your time. To maximize the effectiveness of your documentation, we suggest following a few guidelines we propose here. We recommend providing multiple avenues for users to use your research software, including a navigable HTML interface with a quick start, useful help messages with detailed explanation and thorough examples for each feature of your software. By following these guidelines, you can assure that your hard work maximally benefits yourself and others.

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)0.157
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.426
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1570.426
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0160.011
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0350.039
Open science0.0080.014
Research integrity0.0110.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.079

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
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

Citations56
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBriefings in BioinformaticsSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207