MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747990971 · doi:10.7717/peerj.3678

GeNET: a web application to explore and share Gene Co-expression Network Analysis data

2017· article· en· W2747990971 on OpenAlexafffund
Amit P. Desai, Mehdi Razeghin, Oscar Meruvia-Pastor, Lourdes Peña‐Castillo

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUploadGene co-expression networkComputer scienceGeneGene regulatory networkDownloadNetwork analysisComputational biologyInterface (matter)Data miningGene expressionWorld Wide WebBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (GCNA) is a popular approach to analyze a collection of gene expression profiles. GCNA yields an assignment of genes to gene co-expression modules, a list of gene sets statistically over-represented in these modules, and a gene-to-gene network. There are several computer programs for gene-to-gene network visualization, but these programs have limitations in terms of integrating all the data generated by a GCNA and making these data available online. To facilitate sharing and study of GCNA data, we developed GeNET. For researchers interested in sharing their GCNA data, GeNET provides a convenient interface to upload their data and automatically make it accessible to the public through an online server. For researchers interested in exploring GCNA data published by others, GeNET provides an intuitive online tool to interactively explore GCNA data by genes, gene sets or modules. In addition, GeNET allows users to download all or part of the published data for further computational analysis. To demonstrate the applicability of GeNET, we imported three published GCNA datasets, the largest of which consists of roughly 17,000 genes and 200 conditions. GeNET is available at bengi.cs.mun.ca/genet.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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