MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pathogen–Host Analysis Tool (PHAT): an integrative platform to analyze next-generation sequencing data

2018· article· en· W2905275624 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher M. Gibb, Robert Jackson, Sabah Mohammed, Jinan Fiaidhi, Ingeborg Zehbe

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityLakehead UniversityThunder Bay Regional Research Institute
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHost (biology)PathogenComputer scienceComputational biologyData scienceBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY: The Pathogen-Host Analysis Tool (PHAT) is an application for processing and analyzing next-generation sequencing (NGS) data as it relates to relationships between pathogens and their hosts. Unlike custom scripts and tedious pipeline programming, PHAT provides an integrative platform encompassing raw and aligned sequence and reference file input, quality control (QC) reporting, alignment and variant calling, linear and circular alignment viewing, and graphical and tabular output. This novel tool aims to be user-friendly for life scientists studying diverse pathogen-host relationships. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The project is available on GitHub (https://github.com/chgibb/PHAT) and includes convenient installers, as well as portable and source versions, for both Windows and Linux (Debian and RedHat). Up-to-date documentation for PHAT, including user guides and development notes, can be found at https://chgibb.github.io/PHATDocs/. We encourage users and developers to provide feedback (error reporting, suggestions and comments).

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)0.007
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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.028

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207