Talk:2010 Bar Harbor Agenda: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with '==Minutes== -Mindi XX from RGD- taking over Simon's position ===Grant Aims (Suzi)=== *Aim 1: **building the ontology- regulates relationship, is_a, connecting to external ontol…') |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
* How to find out who is doing what- lot of c.elegans-pathogens papers. Where do you send the pathogen information? No infrastructure for that. It is not that we are having difficulty identifying genes to annotate. | * How to find out who is doing what- lot of c.elegans-pathogens papers. Where do you send the pathogen information? No infrastructure for that. It is not that we are having difficulty identifying genes to annotate. | ||
*All these items available on the wiki. Please use the tracker and add your thoughts. | *All these items available on the wiki. Please use the tracker and add your thoughts. | ||
* We want to build the ontology automatically. CheBI is not requesting terms from us. It is the use of other ontologies to build GO. | * We want to build the ontology automatically. CheBI is not requesting terms from us. It is the use of other ontologies to build GO. | ||
* How are we doing? Metrics? are we meeting our goals? If we can provide some sense of completeness, breadth of annotation etc. Scientist who use the GO should provide metrics on how GO worked for us. Some papers say GO is great, some papers use other resources and so on. * Just because the paper used KEGG, doesn't mean they did not like GO. They probably did not get the results they wanted with KEGG. If people are finding GO to be complex, we shd provide cuts of GO (GO-slims). 2 kinds of consumers (MODs and groups like Reactome and then consumers who stay at a distance and plug in their data into GO). | |||
Revision as of 10:52, 7 September 2010
Minutes
-Mindi XX from RGD- taking over Simon's position
Grant Aims (Suzi)
- Aim 1:
- building the ontology- regulates relationship, is_a, connecting to external ontologies (CheBi, Cell ontology)
- ref. genome- lot of progress
- general annotation, MODS, WGs coming together, coming up with standards- good progress.
So to some extent our aims will remain the same.
- How can we get detailed/rich annotations
- Quality control group
- rate limiting step- literature curation. Improve on item e. Richness is vague. Elaborate on that item.
- Aim 2: Ref.genome
- improve software
- Aim 3:
- 2b-Infrastructure to approach these bacterial folks to make annotations. Do we have better relation with JGI now? Suzi- Yes. She has been invited to give a talk. Jonathan Eisen is involved.
- How to find out who is doing what- lot of c.elegans-pathogens papers. Where do you send the pathogen information? No infrastructure for that. It is not that we are having difficulty identifying genes to annotate.
- All these items available on the wiki. Please use the tracker and add your thoughts.
- We want to build the ontology automatically. CheBI is not requesting terms from us. It is the use of other ontologies to build GO.
- How are we doing? Metrics? are we meeting our goals? If we can provide some sense of completeness, breadth of annotation etc. Scientist who use the GO should provide metrics on how GO worked for us. Some papers say GO is great, some papers use other resources and so on. * Just because the paper used KEGG, doesn't mean they did not like GO. They probably did not get the results they wanted with KEGG. If people are finding GO to be complex, we shd provide cuts of GO (GO-slims). 2 kinds of consumers (MODs and groups like Reactome and then consumers who stay at a distance and plug in their data into GO).