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

SRR594399

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

83/100 · B

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

What this means
claude:haiku

Mouse bulk RNA-seq. Grade B. Good measured quality (Q30 86%, base quality 33.7) with strong depth (113M reads), but elevated duplication (50.07%) indicates moderate PCR bias that may inflate fold-change estimates. Reusable with caution.

Data type / assay
bulk-RNA-seq
Organism
Mus musculus
Instrument
Illumina HiSeq 2000
Platform
ILLUMINA
N numbers (samples, groups)
1 runs
Metrics (value · how obtained)
checksum ok yes reported
total bases 11311127700 reported
total reads 113111277 reported
n content pct 0.003 measured
pct q20 bases 95.5 measured
pct q30 bases 86 measured
gc content pct 51 measured
mean read length 50 measured
mean base quality 33.7 measured
adapter content pct 0 measured
duplication rate pct 50.07 measured
How this grade was computed
Weighted mean of 4 scored metric(s) → 83/100

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 86 measured ×1 80%
mean base quality 33.7 measured ×0.6 95%
adapter content pct 0 measured ×0.4 100%
duplication rate pct 50.07 measured ×0.4 55%
QC cost 8 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 90