MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980681721

Comparison-specialized visualization model for whole genome sequences

2016· other· en· W6980681721 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Library (University of West Bohemia) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVisualizationGenomeSequence (biology)Representation (politics)Random walkDNA sequencingPlot (graphics)Data visualizationDNA
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analyzing and visualizing the whole genome sequence is very important to finding genetic evolution. Many\nresearchers have used 2D or 3D DNA random walk plots to study short DNA sequences. However, visualizing a\nwhole genome sequence is difficult because of overlapping, self-intersection, and biases. In this paper, we propose\na 3D graphical representation of a whole-genome sequence based on a random walk plot. Our 3D graphical\nrepresentation can reduce the overlaps or biases that can occur during the visualization of large sequences by using\nthe 2D or 3D DNA walk plot algorithm. We visualized and compared data on the whole genomes of 10 species,\nincluding humans and anthropoid apes. In our experiment, the 3D graphical representation showed similarities\nbetween humans and apes and differences between other species.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.223 · 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