MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091995276 · doi:10.5206/uwomj.v88is.8233

Blockchain’s potential to address issues in genomics research and how it is being used today

2020· article· en· W3091995276 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tony Jung, Richard K. Le Leu

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Western Ontario Medical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainProcess (computing)Computer scienceBig dataCloud computingData scienceGenomicsVolume (thermodynamics)Computer securityData miningGenomeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in technology have greatly decreased the costs of genome sequencing and expedited the entire sequencing process. As a result, there has been a significant increase in the volume of genomic data. Although this is useful for genomics research, there are two major concerns with this increase in data. First, the greater volume of genomic data requires a substantial amount of computational resources to process and store this data. While cloud services can seem like an effective solution to process and store this data, cloud services aggregate their information in one data center which results in the risk of a single point of failure. With the increase in genomic data, there is also an increase in privacy concerns because genomic data contains personal and sensitive information. People are not comfortable with large companies that store genomic data and people do not want this data shared with the public. Blockchain is a network that can utilize numerous computers to process data and store multiple copies of the database to eliminate the risk of a single point of failure. The blockchain is also a decentralized network which means that it is not regulated by a third party. This allows the data contributors to have full ownership of their genomic data and can decide who can access it. Today, there are several companies that have realized the advantages of blockchain and adopted this technology to store genomic data and give data contributors full control over this data.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.016
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.006

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Western Ontario Medical JournalSame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207