MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001208427 · doi:10.1083/jcb.201904090

A reference library for assigning protein subcellular localizations by image-based machine learning

2020· article· en· W3001208427 on OpenAlexafffund
Wiebke Schormann, Santosh Hariharan, David W. Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEndoplasmic reticulumSubcellular localizationBiologyProtein subcellular localization predictionOrganelleProtein Sorting SignalsCell biologyFusion proteinProtein targetingMutantCellComputational biologyCytoplasmBiochemistryMembrane proteinPeptide sequenceGeneSignal peptideRecombinant DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Confocal micrographs of EGFP fusion proteins localized at key cell organelles in murine and human cells were acquired for use as subcellular localization landmarks. For each of the respective 789,011 and 523,319 optically validated cell images, morphology and statistical features were measured. Machine learning algorithms using these features permit automated assignment of the localization of other proteins and dyes in both cell types with very high accuracy. Automated assignment of subcellular localizations for model tail-anchored proteins with randomly mutated C-terminal targeting sequences allowed the discovery of motifs responsible for targeting to mitochondria, endoplasmic reticulum, and the late secretory pathway. Analysis of directed mutants enabled refinement of these motifs and characterization of protein distributions in within cellular subcompartments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.053

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207