2019 Association of Biomolecular Resource FacilitiesMulti-Laboratory Data-Independent Acquisition ProteomicsStudy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the advantages of fewer missing values by collecting fragment ion data on all analytes in the sample as well as the potential for deeper coverage, the adoption of data-independent acquisition (DIA) in proteomics core facility settings has been slow. The Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities conducted a large interlaboratory study to evaluate DIA performance in proteomics laboratories with various instrumentation. Participants were supplied with generic methods and a uniform set of test samples. The resulting 49 DIA datasets act as benchmarks and have utility in education and tool development. The sample set consisted of a tryptic HeLa digest spiked with high or low levels of 4 exogenous proteins. Data are available in MassIVE MSV000086479. Additionally, we demonstrate how the data can be analyzed by focusing on 2 datasets using different library approaches and show the utility of select summary statistics. These data can be used by DIA newcomers, software developers, or DIA experts evaluating performance with different platforms, acquisition settings, and skill levels.
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 | 0.024 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.155 | 0.144 |
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".