MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157746729 · doi:10.1126/science.abf8424

Environmental robustness of the global yeast genetic interaction network

2021· article· en· W3157746729 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Costanzo, Jing Hou, Vincent Messier, Justin Nelson, Mahfuzur Rahman, Benjamin VanderSluis, Wen Wang, Carles Pons, Catherine Ross, Matej Ušaj, Bryan-Joseph San Luis, Emira Shuteriqi, Elizabeth N. Koch, Patrick Aloy, Chad L. Myers, Charles Boone, Brenda Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)YeastSaccharomyces cerevisiaeComputer scienceComputational biologyBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phenotypes associated with genetic variants can be altered by interactions with other genetic variants (GxG), with the environment (GxE), or both (GxGxE). Yeast genetic interactions have been mapped on a global scale, but the environmental influence on the plasticity of genetic networks has not been examined systematically. To assess environmental rewiring of genetic networks, we examined 14 diverse conditions and scored 30,000 functionally representative yeast gene pairs for dynamic, differential interactions. Different conditions revealed novel differential interactions, which often uncovered functional connections between distantly related gene pairs. However, the majority of observed genetic interactions remained unchanged in different conditions, suggesting that the global yeast genetic interaction network is robust to environmental perturbation and captures the fundamental functional architecture of a eukaryotic cell.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations80
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicFungal and yeast genetics researchFrench-language works237,207