Human Proteome Project Mass Spectrometry Data Interpretation Guidelines 3.0
Bibliographic record
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".