MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884335298 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty655

The epiGenomic Efficient Correlator (epiGeEC) tool allows fast comparison of user datasets with thousands of public epigenomic datasets

2018· article· en· W2884335298 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Laperle, Simon Hébert-Deschamps, Joanny Raby, David Anderson de Lima Morais, M. Barrette, David Bujold, Charlotte Bastin, Marc-Antoine Robert, Jean‐François Nadeau, Marie Harel, Alexei Nordell-Markovits, Alain Veilleux, Guillaume Bourque, Pierre‐Étienne Jacques

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation CentreUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute CanadaCanarie
KeywordsEpigenomicsComputer scienceEpigenomeSource codeVariety (cybernetics)R packageData miningBiologyArtificial intelligenceDNA methylationComputational scienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY: In recent years, major initiatives such as the International Human Epigenome Consortium have generated thousands of high-quality genome-wide datasets for a large variety of assays and cell types. This data can be used as a reference to assess whether the signal from a user-provided dataset corresponds to its expected experiment, as well as to help reveal unexpected biological associations. We have developed the epiGenomic Efficient Correlator (epiGeEC) tool to enable genome-wide comparisons of very large numbers of datasets. A public Galaxy implementation of epiGeEC allows comparison of user datasets with thousands of public datasets in a few minutes. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The source code is available at https://bitbucket.org/labjacquespe/epigeec and the Galaxy implementation at http://epigeec.genap.ca. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207