The ISCB competency framework v. 3: a revised and extended standard for bioinformatics education and training
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivation: Developing competency in the broad area of bioinformatics is challenging globally, owing to the breadth of the field and the diversity of its audiences for education and training. Course design can be facilitated by the use of a competency framework-a set of competency requirements that define the knowledge, skills and attitudes needed by individuals in (or aspiring to be in) a particular profession or role. These competency requirements can help to define curricula as they can inform both the content and level to which competency needs to be developed. The International Society for Computational Biology (ISCB) developed a list of bioinformatics competencies in 2014, and these have undergone several rounds of improvement. In consultation with a broad bioinformatics training community, these have now been further refined and extended to include knowledge skills and attitudes, and mappings to previous and other existing competency frameworks. Results: Here, we present version 3 of the ISCB competency framework. We describe how it was developed and how to access it, as well as providing some examples of how it has been used. Availability and implementation: The framework is openly accessible at https://competency.ebi.ac.uk/framework/iscb/3.0/competencies.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it