Proteomics INTegrator (PINT): An Online Tool To Store, Query, and Visualize Large Proteomics Experiment Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The characterization of complex biological systems based on high-throughput protein quantification through mass spectrometry commonly involves differential expression analysis between replicate samples originating from different experimental conditions. Here we present Proteomics INTegrator (PINT), a new user-friendly Web-based platform-independent system to store, visualize, and query proteomics experiment results. PINT provides an extremely flexible query interface that allows advanced Boolean algebra-based data filtering of many different proteomics features such as confidence values, abundance levels or ratios, data set overlaps, sample characteristics, as well as UniProtKB annotations, which are transparently incorporated into the system. In addition, PINT allows developers to incorporate data visualization and analysis tools, such as PSEA-Quant and Reactome pathway analysis, for data set enrichment analysis. PINT serves as a centralized hub for large-scale proteomics data and as a platform for data analysis, facilitating the interpretation of proteomics results and expediting biologically relevant conclusions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".