MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213738135 · doi:10.1016/j.xgen.2021.100032

International federation of genomic medicine databases using GA4GH standards

2021· article· en· W3213738135 on OpenAlexafffund
Adrian Thorogood, Heidi L. Rehm, Peter Goodhand, Angela Page, Yann Joly, Michael Baudis, Jordi Rambla, Arcadi Navarro, Tommi Nyrönen, Mikael Lindén, Edward S. Dove, Marc Fiume, Michael Brudno, Melissa Cline, Ewan Birney

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Genomics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsOntario GenomicsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMcGill UniversityMcGill Genome Centre
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Human Genome Research InstituteWellcome TrustHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchAcademy of FinlandHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSwiss Institute of BioinformaticsGenome CanadaMedical Research Council
KeywordsMandateData sharingGenomic medicineShared resourceIntellectual propertyResource (disambiguation)Precision medicineData scienceDatabaseComputer scienceWorld Wide WebKnowledge managementBusinessPolitical scienceMedicineComputer securityComputational biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We promote a shared vision and guide for how and when to federate genomic and health-related data sharing, enabling connections and insights across independent, secure databases. The GA4GH encourages a federated approach wherein data providers have the mandate and resources to share, but where data cannot move for legal or technical reasons. We recommend a federated approach to connect national genomics initiatives into a global network and precision medicine resource.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.026

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations57
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell GenomicsSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207