- Action points:
- Rama: remove publications guidelines from main GO website
- Rama: add publication guidelines in the wiki (with a disclaimer that this is internal documentation) (see details in the minutes below)
- Author/user feedback: Rama will set up a pilot study of about a few hundred papers to see if the questions are clear, if people respond, and if we can handle the traffic
Attending SAB at next consortium meeting
- Should we plan on attending the morning session of the SAB? (need to know for travel plans)
Yes ! People should plan to be there the morning of Sept 2nd, the afternoon session is optional.
Update on autophagy
- FYI, the working group is meeting bimonthly. Among things in agenda: working on related SF requests; list of autophagy regulatory proteins for annotation; links with apoptosis and mitochondrial events.
PhD thesis on GO
- FYI, Paola is external advisor for a PhD student, thesis title: “A matter of style. How classification practices and bio-ontologies shape current biomedical research” (graduation ~ Oct 2015). Not sure yet if this work will be published as such. Happy to send round Introduction and Working Plan to managers' list if you wish.
Please circulate your manuscripts to GO-tops/go-managers before publishing
- The GOC needs to have a consistent message. So we ask anyone writing papers about the GO, and representing themselves as members of the GO consortium, should circulate your manuscripts to GO-tops/go-managers before publishing.
- At the same time, GO funding must be acknowledged.
Author feedback form
- We have been asked several times about the quality of our annotations
- Paul T mentioned that, at the Synapse meeting, an author said the annotations made from his paper were not accurate.
- How about we send a form to authors and ask if the annotations made from their papers are correct or not?
Evidences for inferred annotations
Pascale Inferred annotations from interontology links are created using the same Evidence code and reference as the original annotation, but with GOC as the source. This is not really user-friendly. I propose to create a new evidence code that would more precisely describe the process, something like 'inferred from ontological reasoning' (or whatever is the best way to describe this)
Pascale I have been working with Marcus to improve the ECOs, and I have an issue with the doubling of all evidences due to the 'automatic' versus 'manual' assignment methods.