Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

outreach in the grant

Mike Cherry cherry at stanford.edu
Mon Mar 19 12:32:31 PDT 2007


I wasn't thinking that we'd need an IEA meeting for GO.   
Computational prediction of function is a hot research topic and as  
such is the focus, at least a subfocus, of many scientific meetings.   
As far as meetings go, the TIGR course is great and while it is not  
about generation of IEA its more about ISS, they do go over many of  
the quality issues that are concerns for IEA annotations.  Thus I'd  
suggest those planning to do massive IEA annotations go to the TIGR  
course to get a strong dose of what concerns annotators/users.

It is on my to-do list to create a document of minimum standards for  
IEA annotations.  This will not be defining or limiting the method(s)  
used rather it will be stating various details that should be  
included in the documentation for a set of IEA annotations.  I'm  
hoping it will also state a list of pitfalls and concerns that have  
been seen for IEA annotations.  This IEA standards document is still  
in the vaporware stage -- I haven't written an outline yet and set it  
around to a committee of people from outside GO that have agreed to  
review it.

-Mike


The TIGR course is great

On Mar 19, 2007, at 11:38 AM, Rama Balakrishnan wrote:

> Yes. Sure, we (outreach working group) can't be tackling the  
> organizing an IEA annotation meeting. We should point users to the  
> tools available / right groups(insects can contact flybase, fungi  
> can contact SGD etc) /TIGR course etc.... make it part of the flow  
> chart itself.
>
> Thanks,
>
> rama
>
> On Mar 19, 2007, at 4:35 AM, J Clark wrote:
>
>> Hi Rama,
>>
>>> Thanks for sending this part of the grant. It was useful. As you  
>>> mentioned the most important take home message is provide good  
>>> documentation on methods and point users to the right tools. The  
>>> section titled Metrics also highlights the fact that most new  
>>> groups are going to be doing IEAs. So, when we contact new groups  
>>> we should present a flow chart to them on how to proceed, what  
>>> tools to use etc.
>>
>> Yes I think that this is the right bit to take on board.  
>> Documentation of methods seems to be very much our thing right  
>> now. I asked about the tools/IEA part before. Mike says that part  
>> of the plan for the near future is to run an annotation meeting  
>> entirely devoted to discussion of the different ways to make IEA  
>> annotations. Apparently this is still very much an open discussion  
>> and not one that the outreach workking group are meant to be able  
>> to solve alone. Therefore our job for now is to make a very basic  
>> flowchart and perhaps try to fill in more about manual annotation.  
>> Then later the results of the IEA annotation meeting will result  
>> in the creation of much better IEA guidelines. Apparently we  
>> haven't to worry too much about the IEA meeting organization for  
>> now as Mike is going to figure out what to do about that a bit  
>> further down the line.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jen




More information about the go-discuss mailing list