MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101141081 · doi:10.1101/2020.11.20.391300

2019 Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities Multi-Laboratory Data-Independent Acquisition Study

2020· preprint· en· W3101141081 on OpenAlexaff
Benjamin A. Neely, Paul M. Stemmer, Brian C. Searle, Laura E. Herring, LeRoy Martin, Mukul K. Midha, Brett S. Phinney, Baozhen Shan, Magnus Palmblad, Yan Wang, Pratik Jagtap, Joanna Kirkpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBioinformatics Solutions (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyNational Cancer InstituteInstituto Tecnológico de Costa RicaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceSample (material)Data acquisitionSoftwareSet (abstract data type)Data setResource (disambiguation)Data miningInstrumentation (computer programming)Data scienceDatabaseInformation retrievalOperating systemChemistryArtificial intelligenceChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite the advantages of fewer missing values by collecting fragment ion data on all analytes in the sample, as well as the potential for deeper coverage, the adoption of data-independent acquisition (DIA) in core facility settings has been slow. The Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities conducted a large interlaboratory study to evaluate DIA performance in laboratories with various instrumentation. Participants were supplied with generic methods and a uniform set of test samples. The resulting 49 DIA datasets act as benchmarks and have utility in education and tool development. The sample set consisted of a tryptic HeLa digest spiked with high or low levels of four exogenous proteins. Data are available in MassIVE MSV000086479. Additionally, we demonstrate how the data can be analysed by focusing on two datasets using different library approaches and show the utility of select summary statistics. These data can be used by DIA newcomers, software developers, or DIA experts evaluating performance with different platforms, acquisition settings and skill levels.

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)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.031

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207