Parsing and Quantification of Raw Orbitrap Mass Spectrometer Data Using RawQuant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective analysis of protein samples by mass spectrometry (MS) requires careful selection and optimization of a range of experimental parameters. As the output from the primary detection device, the “raw” MS data file can be used to gauge the success of a given sample analysis. However, the closed-source nature of the standard raw MS file can complicate effective parsing of the data contained within. To ease and increase the range of analyses possible, the RawQuant tool was developed to enable parsing of raw MS files derived from Thermo Orbitrap instruments to yield meta and scan data in an openly readable text format. RawQuant can be commanded to export user-friendly files containing MS1, MS2, and MS3 metadata as well as matrices of quantification values based on isobaric tagging approaches. In this study, the utility of RawQuant is demonstrated in several scenarios: (1) reanalysis of shotgun proteomics data for the identification of the human proteome, (2) reanalysis of experiments utilizing isobaric tagging for whole-proteome quantification, and (3) analysis of a novel bacterial proteome and synthetic peptide mixture for assessing quantification accuracy when using isobaric tags. Together, these analyses successfully demonstrate RawQuant for the efficient parsing and quantification of data from raw Thermo Orbitrap MS files acquired in a range of common proteomics experiments. In addition, the individual analyses using RawQuant highlights parametric considerations in the different experimental sets and suggests targetable areas to improve depth of coverage in identification-focused studies and quantification accuracy when using isobaric tags.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".