Data Sharing and Reuse: A Method by the AIRR Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-throughput sequencing of adaptive immune receptor repertoires (AIRR, i.e., IG and TR ) has revolutionized the ability to study the adaptive immune response via large-scale experiments. Since 2009, AIRR sequencing (AIRR-seq) has been widely applied to survey the immune state of individuals (see "The AIRR Community Guide to Repertoire Analysis" chapter for details). One of the goals of the AIRR Community is to make the resulting AIRR-seq data FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) (Wilkinson et al. Sci Data 3:1-9, 2016), with a primary goal of making it easy for the research community to reuse AIRR-seq data (Breden et al. Front Immunol 8:1418, 2017; Scott and Breden. Curr Opin Syst Biol 24:71-77, 2020). The basis for this is the MiAIRR data standard (Rubelt et al. Nat Immunol 18:1274-1278, 2017). For long-term preservation, it is recommended that researchers store their sequence read data in an INSDC repository. At the same time, the AIRR Community has established the AIRR Data Commons (Christley et al. Front Big Data 3:22, 2020), a distributed set of AIRR-compliant repositories that store the critically important annotated AIRR-seq data based on the MiAIRR standard, making the data findable, interoperable, and, because the data are annotated, more valuable in its reuse. Here, we build on the other AIRR Community chapters and illustrate how these principles and standards can be incorporated into AIRR-seq data analysis workflows. We discuss the importance of careful curation of metadata to ensure reproducibility and facilitate data sharing and reuse, and we illustrate how data can be shared via the AIRR Data Commons.
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 | 0.274 | 0.444 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.052 |
| Open science | 0.017 | 0.064 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.027 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.028 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".