Corpus Engine Towards a reproducible .science file.
← All .science files

pmid:39927613

Classification of acute myeloid leukemia based on multi-omics and prognosis prediction value.

Molecular oncology · 2025 doi:10.1002/1878-0261.70000

Paper

partial

Experiment

partial

Data

partial

Analysis

absent

Execution

absent

Execution evidence has not yet been added to this .science file. Explore its methods, data and open questions to plan the next step.
Record details sci_version · id · kind · revision · content_hash · schema · created_at · updated_at · generator
id
pmid:39927613
kind
science-record
content_hash
sha256:7b6519f5e490e770da41b1ed4b4cf443ffb0ad31f2cd5d79f98c6d7029524916
schema
https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json
created_at
2026-11-01T10:25:49Z
updated_at
2026-11-01T14:01:34Z
generator object · 3 fields
name
corpus-assay-engine
converter
sep_to_sci_v1
source_package_schema
urn:bntrg:sep:1.0.0
paper object · 10 fields
state
partial
title
Classification of acute myeloid leukemia based on multi-omics and prognosis prediction value.
doi
10.1002/1878-0261.70000
pmid
39927613
authors
null
journal
Molecular oncology
year
2025
abstract
null
claims array · 1 item
[0] object · 6 fields
id
claim-1
statement
the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding
kind
qualitative
state
blocked
target object · 4 fields
value
null
unit
null
tolerance
null
source
null
evidence array · 0 items
gaps array · 2 items
[0]
abstract
[1]
authors
experiment object · 8 fields
state
partial
objective
the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding
steps array · 3 items
[0] object · 13 fields
id
read_published_estimate
order
1
name
Read the published estimate and its interval from the source
kind
other
state
complete
blocked_on
null
description
The number a replication must land on, and the sentence it came from.
parameters object · 0 fields
inputs array · 1 item
[0]
source:pmid:39927613
outputs array · 1 item
[0]
the published estimate, its unit and its interval
instruments array · 0 items
reagents array · 0 items
[1] object · 13 fields
id
obtain_source_data
order
2
name
Obtain the source data behind the published result
kind
data-preparation
state
blocked
blocked_on
data:not_downloaded
description
The published result cannot be recomputed without the data the paper analysed.
parameters object · 0 fields
inputs array · 0 items
outputs array · 1 item
[0]
the source data with its provenance
instruments array · 0 items
reagents array · 0 items
[2] object · 13 fields
id
run_analysis
order
3
name
Run the analysis programme
kind
analysis
state
blocked
blocked_on
no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment
description
Re-run the paper's analysis on the source data and produce the registered result. | SEP input not carried into the asset list: materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:39927613
parameters object · 0 fields
inputs array · 0 items
outputs array · 1 item
[0]
the registered result
instruments array · 0 items
reagents array · 0 items
materials array · 0 items
instruments array · 0 items
reagents array · 0 items
conditions object · 0 fields
gaps array · 3 items
[0]
step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:not_downloaded
[1]
step:run_analysis blocked on no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment
[2]
step:run_analysis input 'materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:39927613' does not resolve to a declared asset
data object · 3 fields
state
partial
assets array · 2 items
[0] object · 15 fields
id
source:pmid:39927613
role
manuscript
format
xml
media_type
application/xml
uri
https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.70000
sha256
sha256:0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
bytes
null
access
open
state
resolved
reader
null
reader_status
reader_required
identifier
10.1002/1878-0261.70000
version
null
note
Source read by the package builder: full_text.
structure object · 1 field
access_state
full_text
[1] object · 16 fields
id
asset:table:pmid:39927613:1
role
table
format
jats-table
media_type
application/vnd.jats.table+json
uri
null
sha256
sha256:a1b96df705412438896cfdc5bac41854dbba1220dece52a76832689f198c989e
bytes
2515
access
open
state
verified
reader
read_table
reader_status
available
identifier
section[6]/table-wrap[1]#mol270000-tbl-0001
version
null
note
Clinical characteristics in ihCAMs‐AML cohort (N = 98) under UAMOCS. ELN, European LeukemiaNet; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ND, newly diagnosed; R/R, relapsed/refractory.
structure object · 5 fields
pmcid
PMC12161470
section_index
6
section_title
Participants of ihCAMs‐AML cohort for validation
row_count
29
column_count
10
table object · 8 fields
label
Table 1
caption
Clinical characteristics in ihCAMs‐AML cohort (N = 98) under UAMOCS. ELN, European LeukemiaNet; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ND, newly diagnosed; R/R, relapsed/refractory.
rows array · 29 items
[0] array · 10 items
[0]
[1]
Level
[2]
Overall
[3]
UAMOCS1
[4]
UAMOCS2
[5]
UAMOCS3
[6]
Overall P
[7]
UAMOCS1 vs. UAMOCS2 P‐value
[8]
UAMOCS1 vs. UAMOCS3 P‐value
[9]
UAMOCS2 vs. UAMOCS3 P‐value
[1] array · 10 items
[0]
N
[1]
[2]
98
[3]
23
[4]
38
[5]
37
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[2] array · 10 items
[0]
Disease status (%)
[1]
ND
[2]
80 (81.6)
[3]
18 (78.3)
[4]
30 (78.9)
[5]
32 (86.5)
[6]
0.625
[7]
1.000
[8]
0.635
[9]
0.577
[3] array · 5 items
[0]
R/R
[1]
18 (18.4)
[2]
5 (21.7)
[3]
8 (21.1)
[4]
5 (13.5)
[4] array · 10 items
[0]
Age (%)
[1]
≤ 55
[2]
80 (81.6)
[3]
15 (65.2)
[4]
32 (84.2)
[5]
33 (89.2)
[6]
0.058
[7]
0.163
[8]
0.054
[9]
0.768
[5] array · 5 items
[0]
> 55
[1]
18 (18.4)
[2]
8 (34.8)
[3]
6 (15.8)
[4]
4 (10.8)
[6] array · 10 items
[0]
Sex (%)
[1]
Female
[2]
47 (48.0)
[3]
9 (39.1)
[4]
18 (47.4)
[5]
20 (54.1)
[6]
0.529
[7]
0.717
[8]
0.390
[9]
0.728
[7] array · 5 items
[0]
Male
[1]
51 (52.0)
[2]
14 (60.9)
[3]
20 (52.6)
[4]
17 (45.9)
[8] array · 10 items
[0]
HSCT (%)
[1]
No
[2]
74 (75.5)
[3]
19 (82.6)
[4]
28 (73.7)
[5]
27 (73.0)
[6]
0.662
[7]
0.625
[8]
0.586
[9]
1.000
[9] array · 5 items
[0]
Yes
[1]
24 (24.5)
[2]
4 (17.4)
[3]
10 (26.3)
[4]
10 (27.0)
[10] array · 10 items
[0]
Status (%)
[1]
Alive
[2]
62 (63.3)
[3]
8 (34.8)
[4]
23 (60.5)
[5]
31 (83.8)
[6]
0.001
[7]
0.092
[8]
< 0.001
[9]
0.047
[11] array · 5 items
[0]
Dead
[1]
36 (36.7)
[2]
15 (65.2)
[3]
15 (39.5)
[4]
6 (16.2)
[12] array · 10 items
[0]
FAB classification (%)
[1]
M0
[2]
1 (1.0)
[3]
1 (4.3)
[4]
0 (0.0)
[5]
0 (0.0)
[6]
0.001
[7]
0.169
[8]
0.107
[9]
< 0.001
[13] array · 5 items
[0]
M1
[1]
4 (4.1)
[2]
1 (4.3)
[3]
1 (2.6)
[4]
2 (5.4)
[14] array · 5 items
[0]
M2
[1]
35 (35.7)
[2]
8 (34.8)
[3]
5 (13.2)
[4]
22 (59.5)
[15] array · 5 items
[0]
M4
[1]
18 (18.4)
[2]
3 (13.0)
[3]
8 (21.1)
[4]
7 (18.9)
[16] array · 5 items
[0]
M5
[1]
40 (40.8)
[2]
10 (43.5)
[3]
24 (63.2)
[4]
6 (16.2)
[17] array · 10 items
[0]
Cytogenetic group (%)
[1]
Adverse
[2]
18 (18.4)
[3]
8 (34.8)
[4]
8 (21.1)
[5]
2 (5.4)
[6]
0.044
[7]
0.244
[8]
0.007
[9]
0.136
[18] array · 5 items
[0]
Favorable
[1]
21 (21.4)
[2]
2 (8.7)
[3]
9 (23.7)
[4]
10 (27.0)
[19] array · 5 items
[0]
Normal
[1]
59 (60.2)
[2]
13 (56.5)
[3]
21 (55.3)
[4]
25 (67.6)
[20] array · 10 items
[0]
Cytogenetic abnormality (%)
[1]
Complex
[2]
7 (7.1)
[3]
4 (17.4)
[4]
1 (2.6)
[5]
2 (5.4)
[6]
0.002
[7]
0.162
[8]
0.031
[9]
0.002
[21] array · 5 items
[0]
del(7)
[1]
1 (1.0)
[2]
1 (4.3)
[3]
0 (0.0)
[4]
0 (0.0)
[22] array · 5 items
[0]
inv(16)
[1]
9 (9.2)
[2]
1 (4.3)
[3]
7 (18.4)
[4]
1 (2.7)
[23] array · 5 items
[0]
MLL rearrangement
[1]
10 (10.2)
[2]
3 (13.0)
[3]
7 (18.4)
[4]
0 (0.0)
[24] array · 5 items
[0]
None
[1]
59 (60.2)
[2]
13 (56.5)
[3]
21 (55.3)
[4]
25 (67.6)
[25] array · 5 items
[0]
t(8;21)
[1]
12 (12.2)
[2]
1 (4.3)
[3]
2 (5.3)
[4]
9 (24.3)
[26] array · 10 items
[0]
2022 ELN (%)
[1]
Adverse
[2]
33 (33.7)
[3]
15 (65.2)
[4]
14 (36.8)
[5]
4 (10.8)
[6]
0.001
[7]
0.097
[8]
< 0.001
[9]
0.023
[27] array · 5 items
[0]
Favorable
[1]
46 (46.9)
[2]
5 (21.7)
[3]
16 (42.1)
[4]
25 (67.6)
[28] array · 5 items
[0]
Intermediate
[1]
19 (19.4)
[2]
3 (13.0)
[3]
8 (21.1)
[4]
8 (21.6)
locator
section[6]/table-wrap[1]#mol270000-tbl-0001
gaps array · 1 item
[0]
asset:source:pmid:39927613 not verified
analysis object · 4 fields
state
absent
methods array · 0 items
targets array · 0 items
gaps array · 2 items
[0]
method
[1]
targets
capability object · 3 fields
state
absent
requirements array · 0 items
gaps array · 1 item
[0]
capability
readiness object · 8 fields
state
partial
tier
null
blocked_on
null
axes object · 0 fields
can_run object · 3 fields
dsl_operations array · 0 items
assets array · 2 items
[0]
source:pmid:39927613
[1]
asset:table:pmid:39927613:1
steps array · 1 item
[0]
read_published_estimate
must_build object · 5 fields
dsl_operations array · 0 items
converters array · 0 items
readers array · 1 item
[0]
xml
capabilities array · 0 items
data_gaps array · 1 item
[0]
source:pmid:39927613
gaps array · 1 item
[0]
corpus_record_absent
review object · 5 fields
state
partial
machine_critique object · 7 fields
status
blocked
providers array · 2 items
[0] object · 7 fields
provider
minimax
model
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
prompt_version
full-text-reading-v1
prompt_hash
815a13ee8c081312b2e18c1226014c3661ccfed61e0822b801012fb6ef89ce57
source_hash
0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
raw_response_sha256
sha256:7d1bef25a3a3f10258d58db5b396865f357124a41726405a1384d2bae2e98a4a
raw_response_chars
7096
[1] object · 7 fields
provider
minimax_alt
model
MiniMax-M3
prompt_version
full-text-reading-v1
prompt_hash
5a344647000d32ae81fbeef0cb2a24fdfbe4699143f2b4d810cc678bdced30a0
source_hash
0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
raw_response_sha256
sha256:b9daa3a0d00b47f0112c6b49cd337b54b38d02893b7caf3d2db6186c5f199f86
raw_response_chars
67460
target_providers array · 2 items
[0] object · 8 fields
provider
minimax
model
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
prompt_version
replication-target-v2
prompt_hash
6277f01bcc04cff46f90fb98e73cf992fb1f821ade42f412ebdc76cf7fd664d4
source_hash
0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
raw_response
{"parent_value":0.87,"unit":"C-statistic","evidence":"The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.","target_result":"The model reported a C-statistic of 0.87.","number_stated":true}
reading object · 6 fields
parent_value
0.87
unit
C-statistic
evidence
The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.
target_result
The model reported a C-statistic of 0.87.
number_stated
true
source_locator
chars 1210-1392 of source sha256 0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
recorded_at
2026-10-31T15:23:58.237938+00:00
[1] object · 8 fields
provider
minimax_alt
model
MiniMax-M3
prompt_version
replication-target-v2
prompt_hash
5a8f81af0c7b7655431929265bec7a75261601e102b12e1ff8edf2651f61e31e
source_hash
0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
raw_response
<think>We need answer JSON only. Need identify single numerical result headline main finding stated. Source abstract. Registered target: headline numerical result paper states for main finding. Likely C-statistic 0.87 vs 0.82? Need infer "headline number" singular. The paper main finding multi-omics classification. Abstract numerical results include 1391 subjects, 3 cohorts, survival P values, C-statistic comparable 0.87 vs 0.82. They ask value paper itself states for registered target, not calculated. Which is headline numerical result? Perhaps target intended generic extraction benchmark where need identify main result from abstract, likely C-statistic 0.87. Need report headline number only, with exact contiguous quote containing number, attribution. Unit must paper prints. C-statistic dimensionless; unit perhaps empty? Could say "C-statistic" as unit? Schema parent_value numerical. They explicitly headline number only and unit printed. Evidence exact clause. Maybe number 1391? Main numerical result likely cohort size, but "headline numerical result" perhaps performance metric C-statistic 0.87 vs 0.82. Need parse wording: "single numerical result that a replication of the registered target has to reproduce. REGISTERED TARGET: the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding". They expect one. Abstract ends: "The model's C-statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers..." This is clearly a headline numerical performance result. But there are two numbers, own model vs comparator. "value the paper itself states for registered target" Target is main finding, likely headline numerical result = C-statistic 0.87. Need unit likely "C-statistic" or perhaps no unit. Evidence should exact contiguous quote and enough attribution. Quote whole clause: "The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups." This identifies first 0.87 as model? Wording "model's C-statistic ... (0.87 vs 0.82)" implies yes, model vs ELN. Need quote exact typography. parent_value 0.87. unit perhaps "C-statistic". The instruction "unit must be the unit the paper prints." It prints "C-statistic", but that's a metric, not unit. Could unit be empty string because dimensionless. They require unit string, empty allowed. They say leave unit and evidence empty only if no number. For stated, likely unit should reflect metric/unit. In common extraction tasks, unit maybe "C-statistic" or "" if dimensionless. "Report the headline number only: the value..." They might expect unit as "C-statistic" perhaps. target_result can state concise result. JSON only. Could there be a headline number of 1391 consecutive newly diagnosed subjects. A replication of main finding might need reproduce? Registered target phrased broad. Need understand likely dataset/question generation. It may be asking to identify numerical result from paper abstract. Headline numerical result usually abstract's quantitative performance. Here C-statistic 0.87 vs 0.82 is central. "single numerical result" means perhaps select 0.87. The evidence should include exact contiguous quote. Could include only sentence, no issue. target_result perhaps "The model's C-statistic is 0.87, comparable to 0.82 for 2022 ELN." But they asked report headline number only—probably target_result perhaps explanatory string. Schema asks target_result. We should put perhaps "C-statistic of 0.87 for UAMOCS." Unit "C-statistic". number_stated true. Need ensure source exact quote: "The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups." Exact uses nonbreaking hyphen C‐statistic and intermediate‐. We can reproduce. Is 0.87 unambiguously model's? "model's C-statistic is comparable ... (0.87 vs 0.82)" comparison ordering likely model vs ELN. Could quote preceding context: "We developed an unsupervised multi‐omics classification system (UAMOCS) with these data. ... The model's..." Exact contiguous quote could span all, but no need. To make attribution clearer, include "The model's C-statistic..." enough. Unit maybe "C-statistic". Let's reason schema semantics from instruction: {"parent_value": number, "unit": string, ...}. Parent_value perhaps generic numeric extraction. Unit could be "%", "subjects", etc. For C-statistic, likely unit "" (unitless). But they explicitly demand unit must be unit paper prints. It prints no unit for C-statistic; metric itself perhaps not unit. Should unit be empty string. Yet phrase "unit must be the unit the paper prints" likely if result is e.g. 0.87 then unit should be "C-statistic" because printed descriptor. They distinguish unit from target_result. Typical extraction asks parent_value and unit; dimensionless metrics often use metric name as unit. Need inspect likely benchmark conventions. They may expect: { "parent_value": 0.87, "unit": "C-statistic", "evidence": "\"The model's C‐statistic ...\"", "target_result": "UAMOCS model C-statistic", "number_stated": true } This seems reasonable. But perhaps headline numerical result is "1391" and unit "subjects". Let's assess wording. Abstract: "We tried to increase prediction accuracy using a multi‐omics strategy. We interrogated data from 1391 consecutive, newly diagnosed subjects with AML..." This is sample size, a major headline numerical result. Then model performance C-statistic. User asks "find the single numerical result that a replication of the registered target has to reproduce." They may have a target result concept from some benchmark where target is registered by user in natural terms. Here REGISTERED TARGET itself is generic, not specific metric. Need identify paper's headline numerical result. Usually abstract result headline might be C-statistic. They explicitly caution "Attribution may be carried by the text's own wording: a number may be attached to the target by a parenthetical list, by the word 'respectively', or by words that name the target directly. When that is how the text links them, quote the whole clause..." This suggests number may be one among comparison list and need attribution. The sentence with 0.87 vs 0.82 indeed needs attribution ordering. Could be testing ambiguity. The target says "headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding." We need choose one from several numerical statements. "The model's C-statistic ... (0.87 vs 0.82; P=...)" likely main finding metric. Could headline result be "1391" because that's first numerical result? But replication has to reproduce sample count perhaps, though "main finding" not sample size. Single headline number likely 0.87. They ask "value the paper itself states for the registered target, not a value you calculated, converted, averaged or reconstructed." So extraction direct. If target is headline result, 0.87 is direct. If overall survival rates perhaps no actual rates, only p values. There are numerous numbers. Main performance is C-statistic. The paper title prognosis prediction value; key claim model C-statistic 0.87, compared 0.82. Yes. Could "headline numerical result" be 1391 subjects because cohort? Abstract first line says "We interrogated data from 1391..." But replication of main finding requires reproduce cohort and model performance. Yet a "headline numerical result" convention often selects primary metric, not sample size. Need output exact JSON, no markdown. Evidence quote could be just exact sentence. Unit "C-statistic". target_result maybe "UAMOCS model C-statistic of 0.87." They say headline number only perhaps target_result should perhaps only identify target, not add extra numbers? They require target_result string. Maybe "UAMOCS model C-statistic" avoids duplicate value and comparator. Evidence contains all quote numbers though instruction asks exact contiguous quote containing the number, and whole clause due attribution. They say "Report the headline number only" likely means don't report 0.82 in parent_value; evidence necessarily may contain it. Good. Use Unicode exact quote. JSON escaping apostrophe doesn't need. Could evidence include leading/trailing quotation marks? Those wouldn't be source text exactly if added; quote field itself enough. Exact content sentence. Should target_result mention 0.87? likely yes. "UAMOCS model's C-statistic is 0.87." But headline number only maybe this is appropriate. Unit "C-statistic". Let's ensure "paper prints" term exactly C‐statistic with nonbreaking hyphen. Unit should perhaps preserve C‐statistic. Use that. Need only JSON.</think> {"parent_value":0.87,"unit":"C‐statistic","evidence":"The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.","target_result":"The UAMOCS model's C‐statistic is 0.87.","number_stated":true}
reading object · 6 fields
parent_value
0.87
unit
C‐statistic
evidence
The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.
target_result
The UAMOCS model's C‐statistic is 0.87.
number_stated
true
source_locator
chars 1210-1392 of source sha256 0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53
recorded_at
2026-10-31T15:24:20.515591+00:00
agreement
false
disagreements object · 5 fields
target_result object · 3 fields
minimax
UAMOCS distinguishes overall survival rates across the cohorts (TCGA P = 0.042; GSE71014 P = 0.043; ihCAMs‐AML, GSE102691 and GSE37642 all P < 0.001).
minimax_alt
The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.
decisive
false
physical_methods object · 3 fields
minimax array · 2 items
[0]
Ex vivo drug screening using primary AML bone marrow samples, 100% PPC concentration inhibition assays, and drug sensitivity testing across seven concentration gradients
[1]
Cell viability assessment by luminescence measurement using CellCounting‐Lite 2.0 and an EnVision plate reader
minimax_alt array · 6 items
[0]
Ex vivo drug-sensitivity testing using primary bone marrow samples from the ihCAMs‐AML cohort
[1]
Density gradient centrifugation to obtain primary cancer cells
[2]
In vitro amplification of AML cells in AML-specific complete culture medium
[3]
Seeding and culture of AML cells in 384‐well opaque plates with triplicate wells for each drug
[4]
Automated drug administration using a JANUS automated workstation
[5]
CellCounting‐Lite 2.0 luminescent cell-viability assay with relative luminescence units measured using an EnVision plate reader
decisive
false
analysis_methods object · 3 fields
minimax array · 5 items
[0]
Unsupervised multi‐omics classification system (UAMOCS) integrating mutation topography, DNA methylation, and transcriptomics
[1]
Differential methylation analysis using the ChAMP 2.18.2 R package
[2]
Differential expression analysis using the limma package
[3]
Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using clusterProfiler and the Hallmark pathway
[4]
Transcriptional regulon reconstruction using RTN 2.20, mutual information analysis, Spearman rank‐order correlation, permutation analysis, bootstrapping, and two-sided GSEA
minimax_alt array · 7 items
[0]
Unsupervised multi‐omics classification system (UAMOCS) integrating mutation topography, DNA methylation, and transcriptomics
[1]
C‐statistic comparison with the 2022 ELN risk classification
[2]
Differential methylated probe analysis using the ‘ChAMP 2.18.2’ R package
[3]
Differential expression analysis using the ‘limma’ R package
[4]
Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using a preranked gene list and the clusterProfiler R package with the Hallmark pathway
[5]
Transcriptional regulon reconstruction using the ‘RTN 2.20’ R package, mutual information analysis, Spearman rank‐order correlation, permutation analysis, bootstrapping, and data processing inequality filtering
[6]
Individual regulon activity estimation by two‐sided GSEA
decisive
false
statistical_method object · 3 fields
minimax
minimax_alt
C‐statistic
decisive
true
unit object · 3 fields
minimax
C-statistic
minimax_alt
C‐statistic
decisive
true
agreement_basis object · 2 fields
policy
decisive_fields
decisive_fields array · 4 items
[0]
work_type
[1]
number_stated
[2]
parent_value
[3]
unit
blinded
true
human_critique object · 5 fields
status
not_run
reviewer
null
signed_at
null
conflict_checked
false
commentary
null
stages array · 7 items
[0] object · 4 fields
key
target_materials
status
pending
reason
null
evidence
null
[1] object · 4 fields
key
independent_readings
status
blocked
reason
The independent readings are incomplete or disagree; the source evidence must resolve the difference.
evidence object · 1 field
provider_errors array · 0 items
[2] object · 4 fields
key
source_resolution
status
pending
reason
null
evidence
null
[3] object · 4 fields
key
protocol_reconstruction
status
pending
reason
null
evidence
null
[4] object · 4 fields
key
control_execution
status
pending
reason
null
evidence
null
[5] object · 4 fields
key
control_comparison
status
pending
reason
null
evidence
null
[6] object · 4 fields
key
publication
status
pending
reason
null
evidence
null
gaps array · 2 items
[0]
review.human_critique
[1]
review.machine_critique.blocked
execution object · 5 fields
state
absent
status
not_run
mode
null
runs array · 0 items
gaps array · 1 item
[0]
execution.not_run
provenance object · 7 fields
entities array · 1 item
[0] object · 3 fields
id
package:1491099fb7a9c9340144749357c297e848c0f014306f3a63b674a95afc800a3e
type
sep_package
label
SEP v1 package for pmid:39927613
activities array · 1 item
[0] object · 4 fields
id
activity:conversion:pmid:39927613
type
conversion
used array · 1 item
[0]
package:1491099fb7a9c9340144749357c297e848c0f014306f3a63b674a95afc800a3e
agent
agent:corpus-assay-engine
agents array · 3 items
[0] object · 3 fields
id
agent:minimax
type
model
label
minimax
[1] object · 3 fields
id
agent:minimax_alt
type
model
label
minimax_alt
[2] object · 3 fields
id
agent:corpus-assay-engine
type
software
label
Corpus assay engine
source_run_id
run-20261023T122449232913
dsl_catalogue_fingerprint
343fb30756ba6ec3
capability_table_fingerprint
2cb3e42f047d2ecf
snapshot_id
ba34b49490d9bfaf
lineage object · 4 fields
parent_id
pmid:39927613
parent_hash
sha256:b3c99c95b33b212cd7f48ef10967aa0a6dab7f7f7f5927f2745e1f639e6b9027
fork_of
null
gaps array · 13 items
[0]
abstract
[1]
asset:source:pmid:39927613 not verified
[2]
authors
[3]
capability
[4]
corpus_record_absent
[5]
execution.not_run
[6]
method
[7]
review.human_critique
[8]
review.machine_critique.blocked
[9]
step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:not_downloaded
[10]
step:run_analysis blocked on no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment
[11]
step:run_analysis input 'materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:39927613' does not resolve to a declared asset
[12]
targets
Complete file
{"sci_version": "1.0", "schema": "https://corpus.bntrg.co.uk/sci/1.0/sci.schema.json", "id": "pmid:39927613", "kind": "science-record", "revision": 2, "content_hash": "sha256:7b6519f5e490e770da41b1ed4b4cf443ffb0ad31f2cd5d79f98c6d7029524916", "created_at": "2026-11-01T10:25:49Z", "updated_at": "2026-11-01T14:01:34Z", "generator": {"name": "corpus-assay-engine", "converter": "sep_to_sci_v1", "source_package_schema": "urn:bntrg:sep:1.0.0"}, "paper": {"state": "partial", "title": "Classification of acute myeloid leukemia based on multi-omics and prognosis prediction value.", "doi": "10.1002/1878-0261.70000", "pmid": "39927613", "authors": null, "journal": "Molecular oncology", "year": 2025, "abstract": null, "claims": [{"id": "claim-1", "statement": "the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding", "kind": "qualitative", "state": "blocked", "target": {"value": null, "unit": null, "tolerance": null, "source": null}, "evidence": []}], "gaps": ["abstract", "authors"]}, "experiment": {"state": "partial", "objective": "the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding", "steps": [{"id": "read_published_estimate", "order": 1, "name": "Read the published estimate and its interval from the source", "kind": "other", "state": "complete", "blocked_on": null, "description": "The number a replication must land on, and the sentence it came from.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": ["source:pmid:39927613"], "outputs": ["the published estimate, its unit and its interval"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "obtain_source_data", "order": 2, "name": "Obtain the source data behind the published result", "kind": "data-preparation", "state": "blocked", "blocked_on": "data:not_downloaded", "description": "The published result cannot be recomputed without the data the paper analysed.", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": [], "outputs": ["the source data with its provenance"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}, {"id": "run_analysis", "order": 3, "name": "Run the analysis programme", "kind": "analysis", "state": "blocked", "blocked_on": "no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment", "description": "Re-run the paper's analysis on the source data and produce the registered result. | SEP input not carried into the asset list: materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:39927613", "duration_hours": null, "parameters": {}, "inputs": [], "outputs": ["the registered result"], "instruments": [], "reagents": []}], "materials": [], "instruments": [], "reagents": [], "conditions": {}, "gaps": ["step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:not_downloaded", "step:run_analysis blocked on no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment", "step:run_analysis input 'materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:39927613' does not resolve to a declared asset"]}, "data": {"state": "partial", "assets": [{"id": "source:pmid:39927613", "role": "manuscript", "format": "xml", "media_type": "application/xml", "uri": "https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.70000", "sha256": "sha256:0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53", "bytes": null, "access": "open", "state": "resolved", "reader": null, "reader_status": "reader_required", "identifier": "10.1002/1878-0261.70000", "version": null, "note": "Source read by the package builder: full_text.", "structure": {"access_state": "full_text"}}, {"id": "asset:table:pmid:39927613:1", "role": "table", "format": "jats-table", "media_type": "application/vnd.jats.table+json", "uri": null, "sha256": "sha256:a1b96df705412438896cfdc5bac41854dbba1220dece52a76832689f198c989e", "bytes": 2515, "access": "open", "state": "verified", "reader": "read_table", "reader_status": "available", "identifier": "section[6]/table-wrap[1]#mol270000-tbl-0001", "version": null, "note": "Clinical characteristics in ihCAMs‐AML cohort (N = 98) under UAMOCS. ELN, European LeukemiaNet; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ND, newly diagnosed; R/R, relapsed/refractory.", "structure": {"pmcid": "PMC12161470", "section_index": 6, "section_title": "Participants of ihCAMs‐AML cohort for validation", "row_count": 29, "column_count": 10}, "table": {"label": "Table 1", "caption": "Clinical characteristics in ihCAMs‐AML cohort (N = 98) under UAMOCS. ELN, European LeukemiaNet; HSCT, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; ND, newly diagnosed; R/R, relapsed/refractory.", "rows": [["", "Level", "Overall", "UAMOCS1", "UAMOCS2", "UAMOCS3", "Overall P", "UAMOCS1 vs. UAMOCS2 P‐value", "UAMOCS1 vs. UAMOCS3 P‐value", "UAMOCS2 vs. UAMOCS3 P‐value"], ["N", "", "98", "23", "38", "37", "", "", "", ""], ["Disease status (%)", "ND", "80 (81.6)", "18 (78.3)", "30 (78.9)", "32 (86.5)", "0.625", "1.000", "0.635", "0.577"], ["R/R", "18 (18.4)", "5 (21.7)", "8 (21.1)", "5 (13.5)"], ["Age (%)", "≤ 55", "80 (81.6)", "15 (65.2)", "32 (84.2)", "33 (89.2)", "0.058", "0.163", "0.054", "0.768"], ["> 55", "18 (18.4)", "8 (34.8)", "6 (15.8)", "4 (10.8)"], ["Sex (%)", "Female", "47 (48.0)", "9 (39.1)", "18 (47.4)", "20 (54.1)", "0.529", "0.717", "0.390", "0.728"], ["Male", "51 (52.0)", "14 (60.9)", "20 (52.6)", "17 (45.9)"], ["HSCT (%)", "No", "74 (75.5)", "19 (82.6)", "28 (73.7)", "27 (73.0)", "0.662", "0.625", "0.586", "1.000"], ["Yes", "24 (24.5)", "4 (17.4)", "10 (26.3)", "10 (27.0)"], ["Status (%)", "Alive", "62 (63.3)", "8 (34.8)", "23 (60.5)", "31 (83.8)", "0.001", "0.092", "< 0.001", "0.047"], ["Dead", "36 (36.7)", "15 (65.2)", "15 (39.5)", "6 (16.2)"], ["FAB classification (%)", "M0", "1 (1.0)", "1 (4.3)", "0 (0.0)", "0 (0.0)", "0.001", "0.169", "0.107", "< 0.001"], ["M1", "4 (4.1)", "1 (4.3)", "1 (2.6)", "2 (5.4)"], ["M2", "35 (35.7)", "8 (34.8)", "5 (13.2)", "22 (59.5)"], ["M4", "18 (18.4)", "3 (13.0)", "8 (21.1)", "7 (18.9)"], ["M5", "40 (40.8)", "10 (43.5)", "24 (63.2)", "6 (16.2)"], ["Cytogenetic group (%)", "Adverse", "18 (18.4)", "8 (34.8)", "8 (21.1)", "2 (5.4)", "0.044", "0.244", "0.007", "0.136"], ["Favorable", "21 (21.4)", "2 (8.7)", "9 (23.7)", "10 (27.0)"], ["Normal", "59 (60.2)", "13 (56.5)", "21 (55.3)", "25 (67.6)"], ["Cytogenetic abnormality (%)", "Complex", "7 (7.1)", "4 (17.4)", "1 (2.6)", "2 (5.4)", "0.002", "0.162", "0.031", "0.002"], ["del(7)", "1 (1.0)", "1 (4.3)", "0 (0.0)", "0 (0.0)"], ["inv(16)", "9 (9.2)", "1 (4.3)", "7 (18.4)", "1 (2.7)"], ["MLL rearrangement", "10 (10.2)", "3 (13.0)", "7 (18.4)", "0 (0.0)"], ["None", "59 (60.2)", "13 (56.5)", "21 (55.3)", "25 (67.6)"], ["t(8;21)", "12 (12.2)", "1 (4.3)", "2 (5.3)", "9 (24.3)"], ["2022 ELN (%)", "Adverse", "33 (33.7)", "15 (65.2)", "14 (36.8)", "4 (10.8)", "0.001", "0.097", "< 0.001", "0.023"], ["Favorable", "46 (46.9)", "5 (21.7)", "16 (42.1)", "25 (67.6)"], ["Intermediate", "19 (19.4)", "3 (13.0)", "8 (21.1)", "8 (21.6)"]], "row_count": 29, "column_count": 10, "numeric_cells": 154, "header_rows": 1, "locator": "section[6]/table-wrap[1]#mol270000-tbl-0001"}}], "gaps": ["asset:source:pmid:39927613 not verified"]}, "analysis": {"state": "absent", "methods": [], "targets": [], "gaps": ["method", "targets"]}, "capability": {"state": "absent", "requirements": [], "gaps": ["capability"]}, "readiness": {"state": "partial", "tier": null, "blocking_axis": null, "blocked_on": null, "axes": {}, "can_run": {"dsl_operations": [], "assets": ["source:pmid:39927613", "asset:table:pmid:39927613:1"], "steps": ["read_published_estimate"]}, "must_build": {"dsl_operations": [], "converters": [], "readers": ["xml"], "capabilities": [], "data_gaps": ["source:pmid:39927613"]}, "gaps": ["corpus_record_absent"]}, "review": {"state": "partial", "machine_critique": {"status": "blocked", "providers": [{"provider": "minimax", "model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "prompt_version": "full-text-reading-v1", "prompt_hash": "815a13ee8c081312b2e18c1226014c3661ccfed61e0822b801012fb6ef89ce57", "source_hash": "0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53", "raw_response_sha256": "sha256:7d1bef25a3a3f10258d58db5b396865f357124a41726405a1384d2bae2e98a4a", "raw_response_chars": 7096}, {"provider": "minimax_alt", "model": "MiniMax-M3", "prompt_version": "full-text-reading-v1", "prompt_hash": "5a344647000d32ae81fbeef0cb2a24fdfbe4699143f2b4d810cc678bdced30a0", "source_hash": "0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53", "raw_response_sha256": "sha256:b9daa3a0d00b47f0112c6b49cd337b54b38d02893b7caf3d2db6186c5f199f86", "raw_response_chars": 67460}], "target_providers": [{"provider": "minimax", "model": "MiniMax-M3.1-Flash", "prompt_version": "replication-target-v2", "prompt_hash": "6277f01bcc04cff46f90fb98e73cf992fb1f821ade42f412ebdc76cf7fd664d4", "source_hash": "0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53", "raw_response": "{\"parent_value\":0.87,\"unit\":\"C-statistic\",\"evidence\":\"The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.\",\"target_result\":\"The model reported a C-statistic of 0.87.\",\"number_stated\":true}", "reading": {"parent_value": 0.87, "unit": "C-statistic", "evidence": "The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.", "target_result": "The model reported a C-statistic of 0.87.", "number_stated": true, "source_locator": "chars 1210-1392 of source sha256 0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53"}, "recorded_at": "2026-10-31T15:23:58.237938+00:00"}, {"provider": "minimax_alt", "model": "MiniMax-M3", "prompt_version": "replication-target-v2", "prompt_hash": "5a8f81af0c7b7655431929265bec7a75261601e102b12e1ff8edf2651f61e31e", "source_hash": "0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53", "raw_response": "<think>We need answer JSON only. Need identify single numerical result headline main finding stated. Source abstract. Registered target: headline numerical result paper states for main finding. Likely C-statistic 0.87 vs 0.82? Need infer \"headline number\" singular. The paper main finding multi-omics classification. Abstract numerical results include 1391 subjects, 3 cohorts, survival P values, C-statistic comparable 0.87 vs 0.82. They ask value paper itself states for registered target, not calculated. Which is headline numerical result? Perhaps target intended generic extraction benchmark where need identify main result from abstract, likely C-statistic 0.87. Need report headline number only, with exact contiguous quote containing number, attribution. Unit must paper prints. C-statistic dimensionless; unit perhaps empty? Could say \"C-statistic\" as unit? Schema parent_value numerical. They explicitly headline number only and unit printed. Evidence exact clause. Maybe number 1391? Main numerical result likely cohort size, but \"headline numerical result\" perhaps performance metric C-statistic 0.87 vs 0.82. Need parse wording: \"single numerical result that a replication of the registered target has to reproduce. REGISTERED TARGET: the headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding\". They expect one. Abstract ends: \"The model's C-statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers...\" This is clearly a headline numerical performance result. But there are two numbers, own model vs comparator. \"value the paper itself states for registered target\" Target is main finding, likely headline numerical result = C-statistic 0.87. Need unit likely \"C-statistic\" or perhaps no unit. Evidence should exact contiguous quote and enough attribution. Quote whole clause: \"The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.\" This identifies first 0.87 as model? Wording \"model's C-statistic ... (0.87 vs 0.82)\" implies yes, model vs ELN. Need quote exact typography. parent_value 0.87. unit perhaps \"C-statistic\". The instruction \"unit must be the unit the paper prints.\" It prints \"C-statistic\", but that's a metric, not unit. Could unit be empty string because dimensionless. They require unit string, empty allowed. They say leave unit and evidence empty only if no number. For stated, likely unit should reflect metric/unit. In common extraction tasks, unit maybe \"C-statistic\" or \"\" if dimensionless. \"Report the headline number only: the value...\" They might expect unit as \"C-statistic\" perhaps. target_result can state concise result. JSON only.\n\nCould there be a headline number of 1391 consecutive newly diagnosed subjects. A replication of main finding might need reproduce? Registered target phrased broad. Need understand likely dataset/question generation. It may be asking to identify numerical result from paper abstract. Headline numerical result usually abstract's quantitative performance. Here C-statistic 0.87 vs 0.82 is central. \"single numerical result\" means perhaps select 0.87. The evidence should include exact contiguous quote. Could include only sentence, no issue. target_result perhaps \"The model's C-statistic is 0.87, comparable to 0.82 for 2022 ELN.\" But they asked report headline number only—probably target_result perhaps explanatory string. Schema asks target_result. We should put perhaps \"C-statistic of 0.87 for UAMOCS.\" Unit \"C-statistic\". number_stated true.\n\nNeed ensure source exact quote: \"The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.\" Exact uses nonbreaking hyphen C‐statistic and intermediate‐. We can reproduce. Is 0.87 unambiguously model's? \"model's C-statistic is comparable ... (0.87 vs 0.82)\" comparison ordering likely model vs ELN. Could quote preceding context: \"We developed an unsupervised multi‐omics classification system (UAMOCS) with these data. ... The model's...\" Exact contiguous quote could span all, but no need. To make attribution clearer, include \"The model's C-statistic...\" enough.\n\nUnit maybe \"C-statistic\". Let's reason schema semantics from instruction: {\"parent_value\": number, \"unit\": string, ...}. Parent_value perhaps generic numeric extraction. Unit could be \"%\", \"subjects\", etc. For C-statistic, likely unit \"\" (unitless). But they explicitly demand unit must be unit paper prints. It prints no unit for C-statistic; metric itself perhaps not unit. Should unit be empty string. Yet phrase \"unit must be the unit the paper prints\" likely if result is e.g. 0.87 then unit should be \"C-statistic\" because printed descriptor. They distinguish unit from target_result. Typical extraction asks parent_value and unit; dimensionless metrics often use metric name as unit. Need inspect likely benchmark conventions. They may expect:\n{\n \"parent_value\": 0.87,\n \"unit\": \"C-statistic\",\n \"evidence\": \"\\\"The model's C‐statistic ...\\\"\",\n \"target_result\": \"UAMOCS model C-statistic\",\n \"number_stated\": true\n}\nThis seems reasonable.\n\nBut perhaps headline numerical result is \"1391\" and unit \"subjects\". Let's assess wording. Abstract: \"We tried to increase prediction accuracy using a multi‐omics strategy. We interrogated data from 1391 consecutive, newly diagnosed subjects with AML...\" This is sample size, a major headline numerical result. Then model performance C-statistic. User asks \"find the single numerical result that a replication of the registered target has to reproduce.\" They may have a target result concept from some benchmark where target is registered by user in natural terms. Here REGISTERED TARGET itself is generic, not specific metric. Need identify paper's headline numerical result. Usually abstract result headline might be C-statistic. They explicitly caution \"Attribution may be carried by the text's own wording: a number may be attached to the target by a parenthetical list, by the word 'respectively', or by words that name the target directly. When that is how the text links them, quote the whole clause...\" This suggests number may be one among comparison list and need attribution. The sentence with 0.87 vs 0.82 indeed needs attribution ordering. Could be testing ambiguity. The target says \"headline numerical result the paper states for its main finding.\" We need choose one from several numerical statements. \"The model's C-statistic ... (0.87 vs 0.82; P=...)\" likely main finding metric.\n\nCould headline result be \"1391\" because that's first numerical result? But replication has to reproduce sample count perhaps, though \"main finding\" not sample size. Single headline number likely 0.87. They ask \"value the paper itself states for the registered target, not a value you calculated, converted, averaged or reconstructed.\" So extraction direct. If target is headline result, 0.87 is direct. If overall survival rates perhaps no actual rates, only p values. There are numerous numbers. Main performance is C-statistic. The paper title prognosis prediction value; key claim model C-statistic 0.87, compared 0.82. Yes.\n\nCould \"headline numerical result\" be 1391 subjects because cohort? Abstract first line says \"We interrogated data from 1391...\" But replication of main finding requires reproduce cohort and model performance. Yet a \"headline numerical result\" convention often selects primary metric, not sample size.\n\nNeed output exact JSON, no markdown. Evidence quote could be just exact sentence. Unit \"C-statistic\". target_result maybe \"UAMOCS model C-statistic of 0.87.\" They say headline number only perhaps target_result should perhaps only identify target, not add extra numbers? They require target_result string. Maybe \"UAMOCS model C-statistic\" avoids duplicate value and comparator. Evidence contains all quote numbers though instruction asks exact contiguous quote containing the number, and whole clause due attribution. They say \"Report the headline number only\" likely means don't report 0.82 in parent_value; evidence necessarily may contain it. Good.\n\nUse Unicode exact quote. JSON escaping apostrophe doesn't need. Could evidence include leading/trailing quotation marks? Those wouldn't be source text exactly if added; quote field itself enough. Exact content sentence.\n\nShould target_result mention 0.87? likely yes. \"UAMOCS model's C-statistic is 0.87.\" But headline number only maybe this is appropriate. Unit \"C-statistic\". Let's ensure \"paper prints\" term exactly C‐statistic with nonbreaking hyphen. Unit should perhaps preserve C‐statistic. Use that.\n\nNeed only JSON.</think>\n\n{\"parent_value\":0.87,\"unit\":\"C‐statistic\",\"evidence\":\"The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.\",\"target_result\":\"The UAMOCS model's C‐statistic is 0.87.\",\"number_stated\":true}", "reading": {"parent_value": 0.87, "unit": "C‐statistic", "evidence": "The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.", "target_result": "The UAMOCS model's C‐statistic is 0.87.", "number_stated": true, "source_locator": "chars 1210-1392 of source sha256 0eff4cb0fc86ed00876123c89113527f0e388d7836da336fb847769bddf79f53"}, "recorded_at": "2026-10-31T15:24:20.515591+00:00"}], "agreement": false, "disagreements": {"target_result": {"minimax": "UAMOCS distinguishes overall survival rates across the cohorts (TCGA P = 0.042; GSE71014 P = 0.043; ihCAMs‐AML, GSE102691 and GSE37642 all P < 0.001).", "minimax_alt": "The model's C‐statistic is comparable to the 2022 ELN risk classification (0.87 vs 0.82; P = 0.162), but offers a more nuanced distinction between intermediate‐ and high‐risk groups.", "decisive": false}, "physical_methods": {"minimax": ["Ex vivo drug screening using primary AML bone marrow samples, 100% PPC concentration inhibition assays, and drug sensitivity testing across seven concentration gradients", "Cell viability assessment by luminescence measurement using CellCounting‐Lite 2.0 and an EnVision plate reader"], "minimax_alt": ["Ex vivo drug-sensitivity testing using primary bone marrow samples from the ihCAMs‐AML cohort", "Density gradient centrifugation to obtain primary cancer cells", "In vitro amplification of AML cells in AML-specific complete culture medium", "Seeding and culture of AML cells in 384‐well opaque plates with triplicate wells for each drug", "Automated drug administration using a JANUS automated workstation", "CellCounting‐Lite 2.0 luminescent cell-viability assay with relative luminescence units measured using an EnVision plate reader"], "decisive": false}, "analysis_methods": {"minimax": ["Unsupervised multi‐omics classification system (UAMOCS) integrating mutation topography, DNA methylation, and transcriptomics", "Differential methylation analysis using the ChAMP 2.18.2 R package", "Differential expression analysis using the limma package", "Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using clusterProfiler and the Hallmark pathway", "Transcriptional regulon reconstruction using RTN 2.20, mutual information analysis, Spearman rank‐order correlation, permutation analysis, bootstrapping, and two-sided GSEA"], "minimax_alt": ["Unsupervised multi‐omics classification system (UAMOCS) integrating mutation topography, DNA methylation, and transcriptomics", "C‐statistic comparison with the 2022 ELN risk classification", "Differential methylated probe analysis using the ‘ChAMP 2.18.2’ R package", "Differential expression analysis using the ‘limma’ R package", "Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) using a preranked gene list and the clusterProfiler R package with the Hallmark pathway", "Transcriptional regulon reconstruction using the ‘RTN 2.20’ R package, mutual information analysis, Spearman rank‐order correlation, permutation analysis, bootstrapping, and data processing inequality filtering", "Individual regulon activity estimation by two‐sided GSEA"], "decisive": false}, "statistical_method": {"minimax": "", "minimax_alt": "C‐statistic", "decisive": true}, "unit": {"minimax": "C-statistic", "minimax_alt": "C‐statistic", "decisive": true}}, "agreement_basis": {"policy": "decisive_fields", "decisive_fields": ["work_type", "number_stated", "parent_value", "unit"]}, "blinded": true}, "human_critique": {"status": "not_run", "reviewer": null, "signed_at": null, "conflict_checked": false, "commentary": null}, "stages": [{"key": "target_materials", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "independent_readings", "status": "blocked", "reason": "The independent readings are incomplete or disagree; the source evidence must resolve the difference.", "evidence": {"provider_errors": []}}, {"key": "source_resolution", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "protocol_reconstruction", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "control_execution", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "control_comparison", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}, {"key": "publication", "status": "pending", "reason": null, "evidence": null}], "gaps": ["review.human_critique", "review.machine_critique.blocked"]}, "execution": {"state": "absent", "status": "not_run", "mode": null, "runs": [], "gaps": ["execution.not_run"]}, "provenance": {"entities": [{"id": "package:1491099fb7a9c9340144749357c297e848c0f014306f3a63b674a95afc800a3e", "type": "sep_package", "label": "SEP v1 package for pmid:39927613"}], "activities": [{"id": "activity:conversion:pmid:39927613", "type": "conversion", "used": ["package:1491099fb7a9c9340144749357c297e848c0f014306f3a63b674a95afc800a3e"], "agent": "agent:corpus-assay-engine"}], "agents": [{"id": "agent:minimax", "type": "model", "label": "minimax"}, {"id": "agent:minimax_alt", "type": "model", "label": "minimax_alt"}, {"id": "agent:corpus-assay-engine", "type": "software", "label": "Corpus assay engine"}], "source_run_id": "run-20261023T122449232913", "dsl_catalogue_fingerprint": "343fb30756ba6ec3", "capability_table_fingerprint": "2cb3e42f047d2ecf", "snapshot_id": "ba34b49490d9bfaf"}, "lineage": {"parent_id": "pmid:39927613", "parent_hash": "sha256:b3c99c95b33b212cd7f48ef10967aa0a6dab7f7f7f5927f2745e1f639e6b9027", "fork_of": null, "generation": 2}, "gaps": ["abstract", "asset:source:pmid:39927613 not verified", "authors", "capability", "corpus_record_absent", "execution.not_run", "method", "review.human_critique", "review.machine_critique.blocked", "step:obtain_source_data blocked on data:not_downloaded", "step:run_analysis blocked on no owned computational capability is bound to this experiment", "step:run_analysis input 'materials:the source data behind the published result in pmid:39927613' does not resolve to a declared asset", "targets"]}