MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790637397 · doi:10.1128/mbio.00188-18

Erratum for Mor et al., “Identification of a New Class of Antifungals Targeting the Synthesis of Fungal Sphingolipids”

2018· erratum· en· W2790637397 on OpenAlexaff
Visesato Mor, Antonella Rella, Amir M. Farnoud, Ashutosh Singh, Mansa Munshi, Arielle M. Bryan, Shamoon Naseem, James B. Konopka, Iwao Ojima, Erika E. Büllesbach, Alan Ashbaugh, Michael J. Linke, Melanie T. Cushion, Margaret S. Collins, Hari Krishna Ananthula, Larry Sallans, Pankaj B. Desai, Nathan P. Wiederhold, Annette W. Fothergill, William R. Kirkpatrick, Thomas F. Patterson, Lai Hong Wong, Sunita Sinha, Guri Giaever, Corey Nislow, Patrick Flaherty, Xuewen Pan, Gabriele Vargas, Patricia de Melo Tavares, Susana Frasés, Kildare Miranda, Márcio L. Rodrigues, Chiara Luberto, Leonardo Nimrichter, Maurizio Del Poeta

Bibliographic record

VenuemBio · 2018
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSphingolipid Metabolism and Signaling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsSphingolipidClass (philosophy)Identification (biology)Computational biologyChemistryComputer scienceBiologyBiochemistryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volume 6, no. 3, e00647-15, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00647-15. The compound that was used in our article was N′-(3-bromo-6-hydroxybenzylidene)-2-methylbenzohydrazide (BHBM) and not N′-(3-bromo-4-hydroxybenzylidene)-2-methylbenzohydrazide. All experiments described in the paper were done using BHBM [N′-(3-bromo-6-hydroxybenzylidene)-2-methylbenzohydrazide], and the structure noted in Fig. 1B of our original article should be as indicated in Fig. 1 here.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.032

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemBioSame topicSphingolipid Metabolism and SignalingFrench-language works237,207