MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953131636 · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giy103

Monitoring changes in the Gene Ontology and their impact on genomic data analysis

2018· article· en· W2953131636 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGigaScience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsGene ontologyOntologyData scienceComputer scienceComputational biologyGeneInformation retrievalBioinformaticsBiologyGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Gene Ontology (GO) is one of the most widely used resources in molecular and cellular biology, largely through the use of "enrichment analysis." To facilitate informed use of GO, we present GOtrack (https://gotrack.msl.ubc.ca), which provides access to historical records and trends in the GO and GO annotations. Findings: GOtrack gives users access to gene- and term-level information on annotations for nine model organisms as well as an interactive tool that measures the stability of enrichment results over time for user-provided "hit lists" of genes. To document the effects of GO evolution on enrichment, we analyzed more than 2,500 published hit lists of human genes (most older than 9 years ); 53% of hit lists were considered to yield significantly stable enrichment results. Conclusions: Because stability is far from assured for any individual hit list, GOtrack can lead to more informed and cautious application of GO to genomics research.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.265 · 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