A comprehensive LFQ benchmark dataset on modern day acquisition strategies in proteomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the last decade, a revolution in liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) based proteomics was unfolded with the introduction of dozens of novel instruments that incorporate additional data dimensions through innovative acquisition methodologies, in turn inspiring specialized data analysis pipelines. Simultaneously, a growing number of proteomics datasets have been made publicly available through data repositories such as ProteomeXchange, Zenodo and Skyline Panorama. However, developing algorithms to mine this data and assessing the performance on different platforms is currently hampered by the lack of a single benchmark experimental design. Therefore, we acquired a hybrid proteome mixture on different instrument platforms and in all currently available families of data acquisition. Here, we present a comprehensive Data-Dependent and Data-Independent Acquisition (DDA/DIA) dataset acquired using several of the most commonly used current day instrumental platforms. The dataset consists of over 700 LC-MS runs, including adequate replicates allowing robust statistics and covering over nearly 10 different data formats, including scanning quadrupole and ion mobility enabled acquisitions. Datasets are available via ProteomeXchange (PXD028735).
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.011 |
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".