MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605829454 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-01390-3

FlavonoidSearch: A system for comprehensive flavonoid annotation by mass spectrometry

2017· article· en· W2605829454 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nayumi Akimoto, Takeshi Ara, Daisuke Nakajima, Kunihiro Suda, Chiaki Ikeda, Shingo Takahashi, Reiko Muneto, Manabu Yamada, Hideyuki Suzuki, Daisuke Shibata, Nozomu Sakurai

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Bioscience Database CenterRIKENInstitute of GeneticsMinistry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
KeywordsAglyconeFlavonoidAnnotationMetabolomicsMass spectrometryChemistryIdentification (biology)Computer scienceMetaboliteMetabolomeComputational biologyBiologyChromatographyBiochemistryBotanyArtificial intelligenceStereochemistryGlycoside

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, in mass spectrometry-based metabolomics, limited reference mass spectra are available for flavonoid identification. In the present study, a database of probable mass fragments for 6,867 known flavonoids (FsDatabase) was manually constructed based on new structure- and fragmentation-related rules using new heuristics to overcome flavonoid complexity. We developed the FlavonoidSearch system for flavonoid annotation, which consists of the FsDatabase and a computational tool (FsTool) to automatically search the FsDatabase using the mass spectra of metabolite peaks as queries. This system showed the highest identification accuracy for the flavonoid aglycone when compared to existing tools and revealed accurate discrimination between the flavonoid aglycone and other compounds. Sixteen new flavonoids were found from parsley, and the diversity of the flavonoid aglycone among different fruits and vegetables was investigated.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations57
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207