StateHub-StatePaintR: rapid and reproducible chromatin state evaluation for custom genome annotation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome annotation is critical to understand the function of disease variants, especially for clinical applications. To meet this need there are segmentations available from public consortia reflecting varying unsupervised approaches to functional annotation based on epigenetics data, but there remains a need for transparent, reproducible, and easily interpreted genomic maps of the functional biology of chromatin. We introduce a new methodological framework for defining a combinatorial epigenomic model of chromatin state on a web database, StateHub . In addition, we created an annotation tool for bioconductor, StatePaintR , which accesses these models and uses them to rapidly (on the order of seconds) produce chromatin state segmentations in standard genome browser formats. Annotations are fully documented with change history and versioning, authorship information, and original source files. StatePaintR calculates ranks for each state from next-gen sequencing peak statistics, facilitating variant prioritization, enrichment testing, and other types of quantitative analysis. StateHub hosts annotation tracks for major public consortia as a resource, and allows users to submit their own alternative models.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.027 |
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".