MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Scalable Functional Assays for the Interpretation of Human Genetic Variation

2022· review· en· W4294543436 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Tabet, Victoria N. Parikh, Prashant Mali, Frederick P. Roth, Melina Claussnitzer

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Genetics · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Human Genome Research Institute
KeywordsBiologyComputational biologyHuman genomeGeneticsGenomeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scalable sequence-function studies have enabled the systematic analysis and cataloging of hundreds of thousands of coding and noncoding genetic variants in the human genome. This has improved clinical variant interpretation and provided insights into the molecular, biophysical, and cellular effects of genetic variants at an astonishing scale and resolution across the spectrum of allele frequencies. In this review, we explore current applications and prospects for the field and outline the principles underlying scalable functional assay design, with a focus on the study of single-nucleotide coding and noncoding variants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of GeneticsSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207