MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021087545 · doi:10.1088/1478-3975/abacfe

Computational modelling in single-cell cancer genomics: methods and future directions

2020· preprint· en· W3021087545 on OpenAlex
Allen W. Zhang, Kieran R. Campbell

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

VenuePhysical Biology · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchCanada Research ChairsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsGenomicsComputational biologyComputer scienceScalabilityData scienceProteomePrecision medicineGenomeBiologyBioinformaticsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single-cell technologies have revolutionized biomedical research by enabling scalable measurement of the genome, transcriptome, proteome, and epigenome of multiple systems at single-cell resolution. Now widely applied to cancer models, these assays offer new insights into tumour heterogeneity, which underlies cancer initiation, progression, and relapse. However, the large quantities of high-dimensional, noisy data produced by single-cell assays can complicate data analysis, obscuring biological signals with technical artifacts. In this review article, we outline the major challenges in analyzing single-cell cancer genomics data and survey the current computational tools available to tackle these. We further outline unsolved problems that we consider major opportunities for future methods development to help interpret the vast quantities of data being generated.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.282 · 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