AIRR community curation and standardised representation for immunoglobulin and T cell receptor germline sets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of an individual's immunoglobulin or T cell receptor gene repertoire can provide important insights into immune function. High-quality analysis of adaptive immune receptor repertoire sequencing data depends upon accurate and relatively complete germline sets, but current sets are known to be incomplete. Established processes for the review and systematic naming of receptor germline genes and alleles require specific evidence and data types, but the discovery landscape is rapidly changing. To exploit the potential of emerging data, and to provide the field with improved state-of-the-art germline sets, an intermediate approach is needed that will allow the rapid publication of consolidated sets derived from these emerging sources. These sets must use a consistent naming scheme and allow refinement and consolidation into genes as new information emerges. Name changes should be minimised, but, where changes occur, the naming history of a sequence must be traceable. Here we outline the current issues and opportunities for the curation of germline IG/TR genes and present a forward-looking data model for building out more robust germline sets that can dovetail with current established processes. We describe interoperability standards for germline sets, and an approach to transparency based on principles of findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability.
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 | 0.050 | 0.134 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.012 |
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".