MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2574540012 · doi:10.1101/094888

DataMed: Finding useful data across multiple biomedical data repositories

2016· preprint· en· W2574540012 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lucila Ohno‐Machado, S-A Sansone, George Alter, Ian Fore, Jeffrey S. Grethe, Hua Xu, Alejandra González-Beltrán, Philippe Rocca‐Serra, Ergin Soysal, Nansu Zong, Hanna Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Human Genome Research InstituteUniversity of California, San DiegoNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of ManchesterYale UniversityEuropean Bioinformatics InstituteArizona State UniversityMcGill UniversityNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesJohns Hopkins UniversityPurdue UniversitySchool of Medicine, New York UniversityNational Institutes of HealthUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsMetadataInteroperabilityComputer scienceBig dataData scienceData discoveryWorld Wide WebKnowledge extractionService (business)ReusabilityInformation retrievalData miningSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The value of broadening searches for data across multiple repositories has been identified by the biomedical research community. As part of the NIH Big Data to Knowledge initiative, we work with an international community of researchers, service providers and knowledge experts to develop and test a data index and search engine, which are based on metadata extracted from various datasets in a range of repositories. DataMed is designed to be, for data, what PubMed has been for the scientific literature. DataMed supports Findability and Accessibility of datasets. These characteristics - along with Interoperability and Reusability - compose the four FAIR principles to facilitate knowledge discovery in today’s big data-intensive science landscape.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0170.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207