MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MaveQuest: a web resource for planning experimental tests of human variant effects

2020· article· en· W3015080146 on OpenAlexafffund
Da Kuang, Jochen Weile, Roujia Li, Tom W Ouellette, Jarry A Barber, Frederick P. Roth

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Human Genome Research InstituteCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceResource (disambiguation)Web resourceWorld Wide WebComputational biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY: Fully realizing the promise of personalized medicine will require rapid and accurate classification of pathogenic human variation. Multiplexed assays of variant effect (MAVEs) can experimentally test nearly all possible variants in selected gene targets. Planning a MAVE study involves identifying target genes with clinical impact, and identifying scalable functional assays for that target. Here, we describe MaveQuest, a web-based resource enabling systematic variant effect mapping studies by identifying potential functional assays, disease phenotypes and clinical relevance for nearly all human protein-coding genes. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: MaveQuest service: https://mavequest.varianteffect.org/. MaveQuest source code: https://github.com/kvnkuang/mavequest-front-end/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1220.068

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207