Provenance — who produced it, who reused it
Linked to 1 papers in the literature. Roles are inferred factual signals (who deposited the data vs who reused it), with counts — never a judgement about any author.
1 further paper cites this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.
Deep data QC
68/100 · DStandardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured
Long-read nanopore WGS of S. cerevisiae. Grade D (68/100) — this dataset is poor-quality and marginally reusable. The score is dragged down by zero Q30 bases (0%, measured) and extremely low mean base quality (13.5, measured), meaning no bases meet stringent accuracy thresholds; evidence is provisional (0.61) with extrapolated coverage estimates. Before reuse, verify measured accuracy of the assembly and sequence reads independently.
The D grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published WGS thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.
measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0