Transcriptomics data availability and reusability in the transition from microarray to next-generation sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Over the last two decades, molecular biology has been changed by the introduction of high-throughput technologies. Data sharing requirements have prompted the establishment of persistent data archives. A standardized approach for recording and managing these data was first proposed in the Minimal Information About a Microarray Experiment (MIAME) guidelines. The Minimal Information about a high throughput nucleotide Sequencing Experiment (MINSEQE) proposal was introduced in 2008 as a logical extension of the guidelines to next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies used for transcriptome analysis. We present a historical snapshot of the data-sharing situation focusing on transcriptomics data from both microarray and RNA-sequencing experiments published between 2009 and 2013, a period during which RNA-seq studies became increasingly popular for transcriptome analysis. We assess how much data from RNA-seq based experiments is actually available in persistent data archives, compared to data derived from microarray based experiments, and evaluate how these types of data differ. Based on this analysis, we provide recommendations to improve RNA-seq data availability, reusability, and reproducibility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.043 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".