Corpus 1,272 assessed · 1,173 scored · 643 reproduced ≥75 · 168 flagged ·∅ 74.1/100
← Dataset search

SRR11617520

SRA

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 0 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.

No linked papers found in the corpus yet.

Deep data QC

85/100 · B

Standardized, field-standard QC computed by touching the data — every metric states how it was obtained · evidence: measured

What this means
claude:haiku

Sycon ciliatum RNA-seq on HiSeq 4000 with 20.5 million 150 bp reads at 96.9% Q20 and 92% Q30 across 6.14 Gb maintains consistent data quality. The 52.9% GC and good basecalls support expression analysis across sponge developmental transitions or treatment conditions.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Sycon ciliatum
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 4000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 6142530000 reported
total reads 20475100 reported
n content pct 0 measured
pct q20 bases 96.9 measured
pct q30 bases 92 measured
gc content pct 52.9 measured
mean read length 150 measured
mean base quality 38.2 measured
adapter content pct 17.88 measured
duplication rate pct 8.04 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 85/100

The B grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published bulk-RNA-seq thresholds, weighted by its importance; nothing is hidden or subjective.

pct q30 bases 92 measured ×1 100%
mean base quality 38.2 measured ×0.6 100%
adapter content pct 17.88 measured ×0.4 12%
duplication rate pct 8.04 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 16 s compute

measured = computed from the data · extrapolated/reported = derived or from the repository · dq-1.0

Scientific quality

Based on hands-on reproduction of the papers that use this dataset. A reproducible paper that stands on this data is positive evidence; a flagged one is a prompt to look closer — never a verdict on the dataset itself without the evidence.

1 studies use it mean score 50