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

SRR18190482

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

45/100 · F

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

What this means
claude:haiku

Mouse WES on MiSeq with identical metrics to PRJNA811797 (1.85 million 405.7 bp reads, 98.5% Q20, 95.4% Q30) indicates duplicate or linked sample. The 50.7% GC and high basecalls support exome-level SNP discovery and rare-variant calling in mouse genomics.

Data type / assay
WES
Organism
Mus musculus
Instrument
Illumina MiSeq
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 761780345 reported
total reads 1846739 reported
n content pct 0 measured
pct q20 bases 98.5 measured
pct q30 bases 95.4 measured
gc content pct 50.7 measured
mean read length 405.7 measured
mean base quality 36.7 measured
adapter content pct 0 measured
duplication rate pct 97.67 measured
mean target coverage 14.1 extrapolated
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 45/100

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

mean target coverage 14.1 extrapolated ×1.2 0%
pct q30 bases 95.4 measured ×1 100%
duplication rate pct 97.67 measured ×0.5 0%
adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 5 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