MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400455337 · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2024.06.023

TULIPs decorate the three-dimensional genome of PFA ependymoma

2024· article· en· W4400455337 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Johnston, John J. Y. Lee, Bo Hu, Ana Nikolić, Elham Hasheminasabgorji, Audrey Baguette, Seungil Paik, Haifeng Chen, Sachin Kumar, Carol Chen, Selin Jessa, Polina Balin, Vernon Fong, Melissa Zwaig, Kulandaimanuvel Antony Michealraj, Xun Chen, Yanlin Zhang, Srinidhi Varadharajan, Pierre Billon, Nikoleta Juretic, Craig Daniels, Amulya Nageswara Rao, Caterina Giannini, Eric M. Thompson, Miklós Garami, Péter Hauser, Tímea Pócza, Young Ho Shin, Byung-Kyu Cho, Seung‐Ki Kim, Kyu‐Chang Wang, Ji Yeoun Lee, Wiesława Grajkowska, Marta Perek‐Polnik, Sameer Agnihotri, Stephen C. Mack, Benjamin Ellezam, Alexander G. Weil, Jeremy N. Rich, Guillaume Bourque, Jennifer A. Chan, V. Wee Yong, Mathieu Lupien, Jiannis Ragoussis, Claudia L. Kleinman, Jacek Majewski, Mathieu Blanchette, Nada Jabado, Michael D. Taylor, Marco Gallo

Bibliographic record

VenueCell · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineHotchkiss Brain InstituteMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill Genome CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of TorontoAlberta Children's HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGenomeEpendymomaUniversality (dynamical systems)Computational biologyEvolutionary biologyGeneticsGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCellSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207