MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304889470 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2022.1012788

An overview of online resources for intra-species detection of gene duplications

2022· review· en· W4304889470 on OpenAlexafffund
Xi Zhang, David Roy Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeneGene duplicationGenomeComputational biologyMechanism (biology)Computer scienceBiologyGene predictionData miningGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gene duplication plays an important role in evolutionary mechanism, which can act as a new source of genetic material in genome evolution. However, detecting duplicate genes from genomic data can be challenging. Various bioinformatics resources have been developed to identify duplicate genes from single and/or multiple species. Here, we summarize the metrics used to measure sequence identity among gene duplicates within species, compare several computational approaches that have been used to predict gene duplicates, and review recent advancements of a Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST)-based web tool and database, allowing future researchers to easily identify intra-species gene duplications. This article is a quick reference guide for research tools used for detecting gene duplicates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.018

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207