MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2771169143 · doi:10.1186/s13040-017-0155-3

Ten quick tips for machine learning in computational biology

2017· review· en· W2771169143 on OpenAlexafffund
Davide Chicco

Bibliographic record

VenueBioData Mining · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of California, IrvineUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsComputer scienceInformaticsContext (archaeology)Data scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning has become a pivotal tool for many projects in computational biology, bioinformatics, and health informatics. Nevertheless, beginners and biomedical researchers often do not have enough experience to run a data mining project effectively, and therefore can follow incorrect practices, that may lead to common mistakes or over-optimistic results. With this review, we present ten quick tips to take advantage of machine learning in any computational biology context, by avoiding some common errors that we observed hundreds of times in multiple bioinformatics projects. We believe our ten suggestions can strongly help any machine learning practitioner to carry on a successful project in computational biology and related sciences.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations915
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioData MiningSame topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207