CanDIG: Secure Federated Genomic Queries and Analyses Across Jurisdictions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rapid expansions of bioinformatics and computational biology have broadened the collection and use of -omics data including genomic, transcriptomic, methylomic and a myriad of other health data types, in the clinic and the laboratory. Both clinical and research uses of such data require co-analysis with large datasets, for which participant privacy and the need for data custodian controls must remain paramount. This is particularly challenging in multi-jurisdictional settings, such as Canada, where health privacy and security requirements are often heterogeneous. Data federation presents a solution to this, allowing for integration and analysis of large datasets from various sites while abiding by local policies. The Canadian Distributed Infrastructure for Genomics platform (CanDIG) enables federated querying and analysis of -omics and health data while keeping that data local and under local control. It builds upon existing infrastructures to connect five health and research institutions across Canada, relies heavily on standards and tooling brought together by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH), implements a clear division of responsibilities among its participants and adheres to international data sharing standards. Participating researchers and clinicians can therefore contribute to and quickly access a critical mass of -omics data across a national network in a manner that takes into account the multi-jurisdictional nature of our privacy and security policies. Through this, CanDIG gives medical and research communities the tools needed to use and analyze the ever-growing amount of -omics data available to them in order to improve our understanding and treatment of various conditions and diseases. CanDIG is being used to make genomic and phenotypic data available for querying across Canada as part of data sharing for five leading pan-Canadian projects including the Terry Fox Comprehensive Cancer Care Centre Consortium Network (TF4CN) and Terry Fox PRecision Oncology For Young peopLE (PROFYLE), and making data from provincial projects such as POG (Personalized Onco- Genomics) more widely available.
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 | 0.017 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.026 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
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".