「experiment」の検索結果

Treats a ctDNA assay as a molecule-counting experiment at the Poisson edge and builds its analytical-validation case the measurement-science way. Covers the genome-equivalent currency (~330 haploid copies/ng), the lambda = input_GE x VAF sampling ceiling (lambda>=3 for ~95% detection), the error-suppression ladder (raw NGS ~1e-3 -> single-strand UMI ~1e-4/1e-5 -> duplex <1e-7), the CLSI EP17 LoB/LoD/LoD95/LoQ framework, the per-locus-vs-panel-integrated LoD distinction that lets bespoke MRD reach ppm, contrived/SEQC2 reference standards, and honest LoD reporting conditioned on input mass + consensus depth + replicate detection rate. Use when stating or trusting a sensitivity claim, designing a dilution-series validation, deciding how many genome equivalents are needed at a target VAF, choosing a single-locus vs panel-integrated LoD, or auditing a "detects 0.1% VAF" claim.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Differential abundance (DA) and differential state (DS) analysis for flow and mass cytometry - tests which cell populations change in frequency or marker expression between conditions using diffcyt (edgeR/voom/GLMM for DA, limma/LMM for DS), with cydar, CITRUS, and compositional methods (sccomp, scCODA, DCATS) as alternatives. Covers the sample-is-the-experimental-unit principle, design/contrast and mixed-model formulas, compositionality of cluster proportions, and FDR across clusters. Use when comparing populations between groups, choosing a DA method, handling paired/batch designs, or deciding whether compositional correction is needed.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build weighted gene co-expression networks to identify modules of co-regulated genes, relate them to phenotypes, and find hub genes using WGCNA, hdWGCNA, MEGENA, CEMiTool, and Gaussian graphical models. Covers signed-network choice, soft-threshold selection, module preservation, and the marginal-vs-partial-correlation distinction. Use when finding co-expression modules, identifying hub genes, relating gene networks to clinical or experimental traits, or building single-cell co-expression networks. For directed TF-target inference see scenic-regulons and grn-inference; for condition rewiring see differential-networks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Controls error rates across thousands of simultaneous tests in genomics discovery using false-discovery-rate methods (Benjamini-Hochberg 1995; Benjamini-Yekutieli 2001 for arbitrary dependence; Storey q-value with pi0 estimation; local FDR; independent filtering Bourgon 2010; covariate-weighted FDR via IHW Ignatiadis 2016), plus family-wise error control (Bonferroni, Holm) and the GWAS genome-wide threshold. Covers the FDR-versus-FWER choice as the discovery-versus-confirmatory distinction, the dependence assumptions behind BH (PRDS) versus BY, pi0 estimation, the independent-filtering and false-coverage-rate traps, and reproducibility ranking via IDR (Li 2011). Use when correcting p-values from genome-wide tests, choosing between BH/BY/q-value/Bonferroni, setting an FDR threshold, applying IHW or independent filtering, or interpreting q-values. For confirmatory trials with few pre-specified endpoints (closed testing, graphical/gatekeeping), see clinical-biostatistics/multiplicity-graphical.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Analyzes pooled CRISPR screens with MAGeCK (Li et al 2014), covering count generation (mageck count), the RRA two-condition workflow (mageck test using alpha-RRA over per-sgRNA negative-binomial p-values), the MLE multi-condition workflow (mageck mle with explicit design matrix and beta-score output), normalization choice (median vs total vs control-sgRNA vs spike-in), sgRNA efficiency injection, paired-sample testing, time-course design, drug-screen versus dropout-screen design matrices, MAGeCKFlute and MAGeCK-VISPR downstream visualization, and decision logic for when to use MAGeCK vs JACKS / BAGEL2 / drugZ / Chronos. Use when running a fresh CRISPR screen analysis, picking RRA vs MLE for the experimental design, choosing a normalization method from QC signatures, debugging MLE convergence failure or NaN beta scores, comparing MAGeCK output across tools, or building a batch-aware multi-cell-line / multi-condition MLE design matrix.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Analyzes single-cell pooled CRISPR screens (Perturb-seq, CROP-seq, Perturb-CITE-seq, ECCITE-seq, multiome) where each cell carries an sgRNA and a scRNA-seq / surface-protein / chromatin readout. Covers experimental design (direct-capture Perturb-seq Dixit 2016 vs CROP-seq 3'UTR-barcoded Datlinger 2017 vs ECCITE-seq vs Multiome), MOI for sgRNA assignment, escaper-cell filtering (Mixscape, Papalexi 2021), SCEPTRE NB GLM + permutation for low-MOI (Barry 2024 Genome Biol 25:124), the Pertpy framework, factor decomposition, genome-scale Perturb-seq (Replogle 2022 Cell, 2.5M cells), and per-perturbation single-cell DE. Use when running a single-cell CRISPR screen, choosing direct-capture vs CROP-seq architecture, filtering escaper cells, performing single-cell DE, integrating Perturb-seq with pathway analysis, scaling to GW CRISPRi via Replogle protocol, or analyzing multi-omics screens.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Designs and analyzes in vivo CRISPR screens in animal tumor models, organoids, and immune-cell adoptive transfers. Covers bottleneck math (250x cells/sgRNA requires ~25M cells implanted; impossible for most syngeneic models, forcing focused libraries), focused library design (Manguso 2017 Nature 547:413 immune screen; Chen 2015 tumor screens), CRISPR-StAR intrinsic-control screening (Uijttewaal 2025 Nat Biotechnol 43:1848), clonal-dynamics-limited detection, tumor-explant DNA recovery, syngeneic vs xenograft vs PDX considerations, and the relationship to downstream MAGeCK / drugZ analysis. Use when designing in vivo CRISPR screens for tumor / immune / metastasis biology, choosing focused vs genome-wide for animal models, addressing bottleneck-induced clonal collapse, picking the syngeneic / xenograft / PDX model, integrating in vivo with in vitro results, or applying CRISPR-StAR for animal experiments.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Cross-method decision tree for calling hits in pooled CRISPR screens. Catalogs statistical models (MAGeCK RRA, MAGeCK MLE, BAGEL2, drugZ, JACKS, Chronos, CERES), experimental designs each is built for, failure modes outside design domain, reconciliation when methods disagree, multiple-testing and effect-size thresholds, the order of operations (count -> QC -> CN-correct -> hit-call -> validate), the second-best-sgRNA conservative rule, and consensus-hit strategy. Use when choosing among MAGeCK / BAGEL2 / drugZ / JACKS / Chronos for a given design, reconciling disagreement across two or three methods on the same screen, deciding whether to require consensus, gating downstream validation by hit-confidence tier, or interpreting unstable hit lists across reruns.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Predict RBP binding from RNA sequence using deep learning models (RBPNet sequence-to-signal, RNAProt RNN, GraphProt2 GCN with structure, DeepCLIP, DeepRiPe multi-modal CNN) for variant-effect prediction, in silico binding-site discovery, model interpretation, and transfer learning from CLIP and RBNS datasets. Use when computational prediction of RBP binding from sequence is needed, evaluating variant effects on binding without further wet-lab experiments, comparing model performance, or training a custom model on ENCODE eCLIP data.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Identify differentially bound regions across CLIP-seq conditions (knockdown vs control, treatment vs vehicle, disease vs healthy) using DEWSeq (sliding-window DESeq2), Flipper (Skipper-downstream), ASpeak, edgeR, or limma-voom. Use when computing condition-level changes in RBP binding intensity, choosing peak-level vs window-level vs crosslink-level testing, designing replicate experiments, or distinguishing biological binding shifts from technical confounders.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Visualizes ChIP-seq data using deepTools (computeMatrix, plotHeatmap, plotProfile, bamCoverage, bamCompare), pyGenomeTracks (modern INI-driven track plots), Gviz (R browser-style), EnrichedHeatmap (ComplexHeatmap-based), ChIPseeker tag heatmaps, and IGV batch screenshots. Handles bigWig normalization choices (CPM, BPM, RPGC, spike-in scaled), bamCompare operations (log2 ratio, subtract) with SES scaling, k-means clustering of heatmaps for biological subgrouping, and spike-in-scaled tracks for global-shift experiments. Use when generating publication-quality ChIP-seq signal heatmaps, profile plots, genome-browser tracks, or comparing samples visually.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Identifies differentially bound ChIP-seq regions between conditions using DiffBind, csaw (sliding windows), DESeq2/edgeR/PyDESeq2 on count matrices, NormR (control-aware), or MAnorm2. Distinguishes three distinct normalization problems (composition bias, trended bias, global shifts) and matches each to its appropriate fix including spike-in scaling. Use when comparing ChIP-seq binding between experimental conditions, choosing normalization for global vs local changes, integrating spike-in data, or reconciling DiffBind/DESeq2 disagreement.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Designs PROTACs, molecular glues, and bivalent degraders with explicit handling of E3 ligase choice (VHL, CRBN, IAP, MDM2, KEAP1), linker design (length, composition, rigidity), ternary complex prediction (PRosettaC, DeepTernary, AlphaFold3), cooperativity (alpha), DC50 / Dmax characterization, hook effect, and prediction-experiment reconciliation. Use when designing targeted protein degraders, planning linker SAR, predicting ternary complex stability, or building generative degrader workflows.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Design, validate, and plan a startup from scratch. Covers market research, competitive analysis, business model, brand identity, product definition, financial projections, and validation experiments. Trigger when the user has a startup idea to explore, wants to validate a business concept, needs a business plan or lean canvas, asks for market sizing or competitive landscape, wants brand positioning or go-to-market strategy, or says anything like "I have an idea for..." or "is this idea worth pursuing". Also handles resuming from a previous checkpoint.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build and validate experimental WebMCP tools for an existing web page. Use when an agent needs to expose a site's real workflows as page tools, create webmcp.init.js, define deterministic checks, or compare WebMCP with accessibility-tree automation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Implement feature flags for progressive feature rollout using LaunchDarkly, Unleash, or custom solutions. Control feature visibility, perform A/B testing, and enable trunk-based development. Use when implementing gradual rollouts, feature toggles, or experimentation platforms.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generate and run minimal reproducible Python modeling code for the human-approved main method and usable baseline, saving compact experiment artifacts and a canonical run summary.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review, run, debug, and verify approved Python modeling code against its code plan, data contract, method decision, risk conditions, and experiment outputs, saving one compact JSON review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Summarize modeling experiment evidence, compare the approved main method with a usable baseline, surface fallback triggers, and produce a decision-point or final report without creating routine per-round prose.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Translate a human-approved main method and usable baseline into a minimal language-neutral implementation and experiment contract. Use after G2.5 and data readiness, before Python or MATLAB code generation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Review, run, debug, and verify approved MATLAB or Beita Tianyuan modeling code against its plan, data contract, method decision, compatibility constraints, and experiment outputs, saving one compact JSON review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generate and run minimal reproducible MATLAB or Beita Tianyuan compatible code for the human-approved main method and usable baseline, with compact experiment artifacts and a canonical run summary.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build one compact choice card at a genuine mathematical-modeling judgment point. Use before method screening, after a meaningful experiment, or before final claim/freeze approval so the human chooses the trade-off while AI handles mechanical consequences.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Experimental Vulkan AST-to-LLVM-to-SPIR-V backend, its fail-closed runtime-interface boundary, LLVM build integration, and validation path.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。