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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is considerable interest in the bioinformatics community in creating pathway databases. The Reactome project (a collaboration between the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York University Medical Center, and the European Bioinformatics Institute) is one such pathway database and collects structured information on all the biological pathways and processes in the human. It is an expert‐authored and peer‐reviewed, curated collection of well‐documented molecular reactions that span the gamut from simple intermediate metabolism to signaling pathways and complex cellular events. This information is supplemented with likely orthologous molecular reactions in mouse, rat, zebrafish, worm, and other model organisms. This unit describes how to use the Reactome database to learn the steps of a biological pathway; navigate and browse through the Reactome database; identify the pathways in which a molecule of interest is involved; use the Pathway and Expression analysis tools to search the database for and visualize possible connections within user‐supplied experimental data set and Reactome pathways; and the Species Comparison tool to compare human and model organism pathways. Curr. Protoc. Bioinform . 38:8.7.1‐8.7.23. © 2012 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it