MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803674859 · doi:10.1002/pmic.201800110

Minimal Information About an Immuno‐Peptidomics Experiment (MIAIPE)

2018· article· en· W2803674859 on OpenAlexaff
Jennie R. Lill, Peter A. van Veelen, Stefan Tenzer, Arie Admon, Étienne Caron, Joshua E. Elias, Albert J. R. Heck, Miguel Marcilla, Fabio Marino, Markus Müller, Bjoern Peters, Anthony W. Purcell, Alessandro Sette, Theo Sturm, Nicola Ternette, Juan Antonio Vizcaíno, Michal Bassani‐Sternberg

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
Canadian institutionsMicrosemi (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekEuropean CommissionIsrael Science FoundationLudwig Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsProteomicsProteomeHuman proteome projectQuantitative proteomicsComputational biologyComputer scienceBioinformaticsData scienceBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minimal information about an immuno-peptidomics experiment (MIAIPE) is an initiative of the members of the Human Immuno-Peptidome Project (HIPP), an international program organized by the Human Proteome Organization (HUPO). The aim of the MIAIPE guidelines is to deliver technical guidelines representing the minimal information required to sufficiently support the evaluation and interpretation of immunopeptidomics experiments. The MIAIPE document has been designed to report essential information about sample preparation, mass spectrometric measurement, and associated mass spectrometry (MS)-related bioinformatics aspects that are unique to immunopeptidomics and may not be covered by the general proteomics MIAPE (minimal information about a proteomics experiment) guidelines.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.034

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainReporting
GenreMethods

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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicvaccines and immunoinformatics approachesFrench-language works237,207