Mail-In Crystallography at the Canadian Light Source
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Macromolecular Crystallography Facility (CMCF) operates two crystallography beamlines, 08ID-1 and 08B1-1 (http://cmcf.lightsource.ca), at the Canadian Light Source (CLS). Normal access is through a traditional peer review process but commercial access is also welcome. Users apply for beamtime against their active proposals and may collect data in person or via remote access (Remote Control or Mail-In). Remote Control allows users to control the beamlines remotely from home institutions. Additionally, users with the highest peer review scores have the option of Mail-In beamtime, where data are collected by CMCF staff according to investigators' instructions. This method has proven very effective for several reasons. Data are collected by trained personnel experienced with the beamlines, resulting in high quality data. Travel expenses are eliminated. Data are collected around regular user shifts using the most appropriate beamline, reducing wasted beamtime and providing flexibility. The process is made extremely efficient when integrated with MxLIVE, the CMCF Laboratory Information Management System, since images can be viewed and output files downloaded almost immediately after data have been collected for the user. Four Mail-In shifts per week are typically supported during normal operations. In 2013 alone, over 430 datasets were collected for more than 20 investigators across Canada. At least 12 peer-reviewed articles appeared in 2013 containing Mail-In data, many in high-impact journals. Several of these results will be discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.242 | 0.086 |
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".