Harmonizing the Generation and Pre-publication Stewardship of FAIR bioimage data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Together with the molecular knowledge of genes and proteins, biological images promise to significantly enhance the scientific understanding of complex cellular systems and to advance predictive and personalized therapeutic products for human health.For this potential to be realized, quality-assured bioimage data must be shared among labs at a global scale to be compared, pooled, and reanalyzed, thus unleashing untold potential beyond the original purpose for which the data was generated.There are two broad sets of requirements to enable bioimage data sharing in the life sciences.One set of requirements is articulated in the companion White Paper entitled "Enabling Global Image Data Sharing in the Life Sciences," which is published in parallel and addresses the need to build the cyberinfrastructure for sharing bioimage data (arXiv:2401.13023[q-bio.OT],
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 | 0.423 | 0.574 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.024 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.041 | 0.052 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.044 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.029 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".