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
SARS-CoV-2 amplicon with moderate adapter contamination (14.31%, measured) and moderate sequencing depth (3.4M reads), limiting grade to D. Adapter score of 5/100 (weight 0.5) combined with Q30=96.2% (measured) suggests borderline-acceptable quality for exploratory variant surveys but problematic for clinical thresholds. Conditional reuse pending trim validation.
The D grade is a transparent weighted average. Each metric below scored from 0–100% against the published amplicon 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