MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897791282 · doi:10.1089/crispr.2018.0043

A Unified Resource for Tracking Anti-CRISPR Names

2018· letter· en· W2897791282 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Bondy‐Denomy, Alan R. Davidson, Jennifer A. Doudna, Peter C. Fineran, Karen L. Maxwell, Sylvain Moineau, Xu Peng, Eric J. Sontheimer, Blake Wiedenheft

Bibliographic record

VenueThe CRISPR Journal · 2018
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNovo Nordisk Fonden
KeywordsCRISPRResource (disambiguation)Computer scienceBiologyGeneticsGeneComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the battle between CRISPR-Cas* prokaryotic immune systems and the elements that they target, a diverse array of ''anti-CRISPR'' proteins have evolved.These proteins appear to have arisen independently multiple times in evolution and function through diverse mechanisms to inhibit CRISPR-Cas immunity.For comprehensive reviews on anti-CRISPRs, we direct readers to recent publications.1,2 Due to the increasing interest in anti-CRISPRs, many new families of these proteins have been discovered in the past year or so.There are now 36 distinct families of anti-CRISPRs described in the literature that block seven subtypes of CRISPR-Cas systems.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] In 2015, a naming system for anti-CRISPR genes and proteins was introduced.6,13 To date, this system has been followed in all subsequent publications describing newly discovered anti-CRISPRs.However, as the rate of anti-CRISPR discovery will likely accelerate in the coming years, we feel that it would be advantageous to establish a database for the registration and tracking of anti-CRISPR names.The primary goal of this database will be to prevent redundant names being used in publications, thus avoiding confusion in the literature.Anti-CRISPR proteins are named according to the subtype they inhibit and the order in which they were discovered-for example, AcrIF1 was the first anti-CRISPR protein identified to inhibit the type I-F system.The database (a Google document) can be found here: https://tinyurl.com/anti-CRISPRWe propose that this document be updated when researchers have had a manuscript accepted for publication in which new anti-CRISPRs are described.We suggest that the authors upload relevant data to the spreadsheet, including the name, CRISPR-Cas subtype inhibited, reference, and amino-acid sequence of the anti-CRISPR (Table 1).This spreadsheet may also be utilized by those preparing a manuscript for submission to ensure that they use anti-CRISPR names that are still available.

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)0.033
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0120.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.051

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations145
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe CRISPR JournalSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207