Reviewing the Knowledge Base of Special Education Leadership and Administration from 1970-2009.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data dependent acquisition (DDA) and data independent acquisition (DIA) are traditionally separate experimental paradigms in bottom-up proteomics. In this work, we developed a strategy combining the two experimental methods into a single LC-MS/MS run. We call the novel strategy data dependent-independent acquisition proteomics, or DDIA for short. Peptides identified from DDA scans by a conventional and robust DDA identification workflow provide useful information for interrogation of DIA scans. Deep learning based LC-MS/MS property prediction tools, developed previously, can be used repeatedly to produce spectral libraries facilitating DIA scan extraction. A complete DDIA data processing pipeline, including the modules for iRT vs RT calibration curve generation, DIA extraction classifier training, and false discovery rate control, has been developed. Compared to another spectral library-free method, DIA-Umpire, the DDIA method produced a similar number of peptide identifications, but nearly twice as many protein group identifications. The primary advantage of the DDIA method is that it requires minimal information for processing its data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".