Human Proteome Project Mass Spectrometry Data Interpretation Guidelines 3.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Human Proteome Organization’s (HUPO) Human Proteome Project (HPP) developed Mass Spectrometry (MS) Data Interpretation Guidelines that have been applied since 2016. These guidelines have helped ensure that the emerging draft of the complete human proteome is highly accurate and with low numbers of false-positive protein identifications. Here, we describe an update to these guidelines based on consensus-reaching discussions with the wider HPP community over the past year. The revised 3.0 guidelines address several major and minor identified gaps. We have added guidelines for emerging data independent acquisition (DIA) MS workflows and for use of the new Universal Spectrum Identifier (USI) system being developed by the HUPO Proteomics Standards Initiative (PSI). In addition, we discuss updates to the standard HPP pipeline for collecting MS evidence for all proteins in the HPP, including refinements to minimum evidence. We present a new plan for incorporating MassIVE-KB into the HPP pipeline for the next (HPP 2020) cycle in order to obtain more comprehensive coverage of public MS data sets. The main checklist has been reorganized under headings and subitems and related guidelines have been grouped. In sum, Version 2.1 of the HPP MS Data Interpretation Guidelines has served well and this timely update to version 3.0 will aid the HPP as it approaches its goal of collecting and curating MS evidence of translation and expression for all predicted ∼20,000 human proteins encoded by the human genome. Abstract Figure
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 | 0.038 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.091 |
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".