MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951879533 · doi:10.1186/s13104-018-3507-2

GrapHi-C: graph-based visualization of Hi-C datasets

2018· article· en· W2951879533 on OpenAlexafffund
Kimberly MacKay, Anthony Kusalik, Christopher H. Eskiw

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Research Notes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVisualizationGraphComputer scienceComputational biologyData miningBiologyTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Hi-C is a proximity-based ligation reaction used to detect regions of the genome that are close in 3D space (or "interacting"). Typically, results from Hi-C experiments (contact maps) are visualized as heatmaps or Circos plots. While informative, these visualizations do not directly represent genomic structure and folding, making the interpretation of the underlying 3D genomic organization obscured. Our objective was to generate a graph-based contact map representation that leads to a more intuitive structural visualization. RESULTS: Normalized contact maps were converted into undirected graphs where each vertex represented a genomic region and each edge represented a detected (intra- and inter-chromosomal) or known (linear) interaction between two regions. Each edge was weighted by the inverse of the linear distance (Hi-C experimental resolution) or the interaction frequency from the contact map. Graphs were generated based on this representation scheme for contact maps from existing fission yeast datasets. Originally, these datasets were used to (1) identify specific principles influencing fission yeast genome organization and (2) uncover changes in fission yeast genome organization during the cell cycle. When compared to the equivalent heatmaps and/or Circos plots, the graph-based visualizations more intuitively depicted the changes in genome organization described in the original studies.

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 score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 venueBMC Research NotesSame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207