MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209532625 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4711229

4DN-BINA-OME (NBO) Tiered Microscopy Metadata Specifications - v2.01 - XLS Spreadsheet and Entity Relationship schemas

2021· article· en· W3209532625 on OpenAlex
Alex Rigano, Ulrike Boehm, James J. Chambers, Nathalie Gaudreault, Alison J. North, Jaime A. Pimentel, Damir Sudar, Peter Bajcsy, Claire M. Brown, Alexander D. Corbett, Orestis Faklaris, Judith Lacoste, Alex Laude, Glyn Nelson, David Grünwald, Caterina Strambio‐De‐Castillia

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceProgramming languageWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<strong>This an XLS Spreadsheet and three Entity-Relationship Schemas representing the latest version (v02.01) of the 4DN-BINA-OME (NBO) tiered system of Microscopy Metadata Specifications extending the OME Data Model.</strong> <em>Note: v2.01 is a minor release that corrects minor errors that were found in v2.00.</em> While the power of modern microscopy techniques is undeniable, rigorous record-keeping and quality control are required to ensure that imaging data may be properly interpreted (quality), reproduced (reproducibility), and used to extract reliable information and scientific knowledge which can be shared for further analysis (value). In the absence of agreed guidelines, it is inherently difficult for scientists to create comprehensive records of imaging experiments and ensure the quality of resulting image data or for manufacturers to incorporate standardized reporting and performance metrics. To solve this problem, the 4D Nucleome (4DN) Initiative and BioImaging North America (BINA) here propose light Microscopy Metadata specifications that scale with experimental intent and with the complexity of the instrumentation and analytical requirements. They consist of a set of three extensions of the latest version of the Open Microscopy Environment (OME) Data Model, which was released in 2016. Because of their scalable nature, the 4DN-BINA-OME Microscopy Metadata Specifications clearly specify which provenance and quality control metadata should be recorded for a given experiment. Last but not least, this endeavor is closely aligned with the undertakings of the recently established global community initiative dedicated to Quality Assessment and Reproducibility in Light Microscopy (QUAREP-LiMi; quarep.org). As a result, the ensuing flexible 4DN-BINA-OME (NBO) framework represents a turning point towards achieving community-driven Microscopy Metadata standards that would increase data fidelity, improve repeatability and reproducibility, ease future analysis and facilitate the verifiable comparison of different datasets, experimental setups, and assays. The intention of this proposal is to encourage participation, critiques, and contributions from the entire imaging community and all stakeholders, including research and imaging scientists, facility personnel, instrument manufacturers, software developers, standards organizations, journals, and funding agencies.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0150.021
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.145 · 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