RawTools: Rapid and Dynamic Interrogation of Orbitrap Data Files for Mass Spectrometer System Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Optimizing the quality of proteomics data collected from a mass spectrometer (MS) requires careful selection of acquisition parameters and proper assessment of instrument performance. Software tools capable of extracting a broad set of information from raw files, including meta, scan, quantification, and identification data are needed to provide guidance for MS system management. In this work, direct extraction and utilization of these data from Thermo Orbitrap raw files is demonstrated using the RawTools software. RawTools is a standalone tool for extracting meta and scan data directly from raw MS files generated on Thermo Orbitrap instruments. RawTools generates summarized and detailed plain text outputs after parsing individual raw files, including scan rates and durations, duty cycle characteristics, precursor and reporter ion quantification, and chromatography performance. RawTools also contains a diagnostic module that includes an optional ‘preview’ database search for facilitating informed decision-making related to optimization of MS performance based on a variety of metrics. RawTools has been developed in C# and utilizes the Thermo RawFileReader library, and thus can process raw MS files with high speed and high efficiency on all major operating systems (Windows, MacOS, Linux). To demonstrate the utility of RawTools, extraction of meta and scan data from both individual and large collections of raw MS files was carried out to identify problematic characteristics of instrument performance. Taken together, the combined rich feature-set of RawTools with the capability for interrogation of MS and experiment performance makes this software a valuable tool for proteomics researchers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.032 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".