Difference between revisions of "Associating genes with papers"
From WormBaseWiki
Jump to navigationJump to searchLine 18: | Line 18: | ||
#[[What to do about supplemental data]] | #[[What to do about supplemental data]] | ||
#[[What to do about non-standard nomenclature]] | #[[What to do about non-standard nomenclature]] | ||
+ | #[[Current pipeline - what happens when gene IDs are made invalid?]] | ||
Back to [[Paper Pipeline]] | Back to [[Paper Pipeline]] |
Revision as of 15:20, 5 January 2010
Several possible strategies to test.
Ideally, we'd like to get associations made as quickly as possible (better for users, helps for curation).
For now, restricting analysis to research articles (primary data).
Results may differ for sectioned vs non-sectioned papers, and will likely differ for Reviews, etc.
- Abstracts
- Gene frequency
- Genes in Results (or equivalent)
- Gene frequency in Results (or equivalent)
- Genes mentioned along with word in Figure or Table category
- Genes for which there is curated data
- Some combination of the above
- What to do about large-scale papers
- What to do about new gene names not yet in WB
- What to do about supplemental data
- What to do about non-standard nomenclature
- Current pipeline - what happens when gene IDs are made invalid?
Back to Paper Pipeline