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

SRR3111611

SRA

Provenance — who produced it, who reused it

Linked to 2 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.

Reused by

2 further papers cite this accession but reuse could not be confirmed.

Deep data QC

87/100 · B

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

What this means
claude:haiku

Bulk RNA-seq (NextSeq 500, human). B-grade (87/100) dataset with acceptable quality. Mean base quality of 31.8 is the primary limiting factor (scored 63/100, weight 0.6), but Q30 bases of 88.2% remain adequate for expression quantification. Reusable for standard applications with awareness of modest base-calling confidence.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Homo sapiens
Instrument
NextSeq 500
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 291225088 reported
total reads 4550392 reported
n content pct 7.787 measured
pct q20 bases 89.5 measured
pct q30 bases 88.2 measured
gc content pct 45.3 measured
mean read length 32 measured
mean base quality 31.8 measured
adapter content pct 0 measured
duplication rate pct 28.83 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 87/100

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 88.2 measured ×1 91%
mean base quality 31.8 measured ×0.6 63%
adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 28.83 measured ×0.4 100%
QC cost 20 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 1 reproduced mean score 78