1-20 of 9526
Sort by
Image
Published: 05 February 2025
Figure 3. The distribution of RNA types selected for summarization.
Image
Published: 05 February 2025
Figure 4. Example summary generated by the tool. This example is an lncRNA, examples for other RNA types can be found in Appendix C of the Supplementary material .
Journal Article
Andrew Green and others
Database, Volume 2025, 2025, baaf006, https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baaf006
Published: 05 February 2025
Image
Published: 05 February 2025
Figure 1. (a) The initial prompt used to generate a first-pass summary from the generated context. Variables are enclosed in {} and are replaced with their values before sending the prompt to the LLM. (b) Prompts used for the self-consistency checking stage including inaccurate statement detection and revisio
Image
Published: 05 February 2025
Figure 2. A flow diagram of the whole LitSumm tool. Information from the EuropePMC API flows from the left to the right, through a sentence selection step before several rounds of self-checking and refinement. Finished summaries are written to disk before being uploaded to the RNAcentral database enmasse.
Image
Published: 05 February 2025
Figure 6. The average rating per summary across all raters. Note that Rater 3 gave scores only for a subset of 21 miRNAs.
Image
Published: 05 February 2025
Figure 5. Example output of the veracity checker. In this case, CTBP1-DT presents two sentences validated as TRUE and two FALSE sentences. The offending sentences have been removed by the model in the final summary.
Journal Article
Database, Volume 2025, 2025, baaf007, https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baaf007
Published: 31 January 2025
Journal Article
Limin Zhang and others
Database, Volume 2025, 2025, baae097, https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baae097
Published: 29 January 2025
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 2. Top-level classes in the Carex Ontology.
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 4. The matrix page of Character Recorder.
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 5. The Character State Window, accessible when the user clicks on any data cell of a categorical character.
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 9. Summary of the responses to “Your experience with features of Character Recorder” in recording clear characters compared to Excel.
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 10. Summary of responses to “Your experience with the main components of Character Recorder - Responded quickly.”
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 13. Summary of responses to “Your experience with the main components of Character Recorder: My experience with it was.”
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 14. Summary of participant responses to “Your experience with features of Character Recorder.”
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 16. Summary of participant final comparison between Character Recorder and Excel and their recommendations.
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 1. System diagram for the author-driven computable phenotypic data and ontology development platform.
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 8. Summary of the responses to “Your experience with the main components of Character Recorder: - Did what I wanted it to do.”
Image
Published: 29 January 2025
Figure 12. Summary of Participant Responses to “Your perceived task load with Character Recorder.”