Result

10.8% pct-unlabeled

pct-unlabeled — ucc-research-eval-abdelaal-baron-human-scpred

Tested configuration: scPred — Abdelaal et al. 2019 Table 1
Protocol: Abdelaal et al. 2019 intra-dataset 5-fold CV: Baron Human pancreatic dataset
Dataset: Baron Human pancreatic scRNA-seq dataset (Abdelaal et al. 2019, Table 2)
Procedure: Not reported
Evaluation: abdelaal baron human scpred
Coverage: scored: unreported; eligible: unreported
Uncertainty: Not reported
Evidence: Author-reported evaluation · source checkedA comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data · Quoted verbatim, same location: "SVM rejection, scmapcell, and scPred assigned 1.5%, 4.2%, and 10.8% of the cells, respectively, as unlabeled while SVM (without rejection) classified 100% of the cells with a median F1-score of 0.98 (Fig. 1b)." Fig. 1b, scPred row.

A source-checked result verifies the numerical transcription, not every model or protocol detail. Evaluation metadata: source checked. Source checked does not mean independently reproduced.

Reproduction

Split: Intra-dataset stratified 5-fold cross-validation; identical folds across classifiers
Adaptation: Not reported
Scoring implementation: Not reported

No execution recipe has been verified for this exact configuration and evaluation. A benchmark's general instructions may use different inputs, splits or model settings.

Access requirements and official instructions: Abdelaal et al. 2019 intra-dataset 5-fold CV: Baron Human pancreatic dataset

Reproducing this published result requires matching its model configuration, data, split and scorer. Source checking or a successful smoke test does not establish score reproduction.

Evidence

Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.

Evidence table

Inspect claims, sources and review details

Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.

One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.

1 evidence row matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-06-161b59a1d02c
Property and statement	Original source and location	Review and provenance
Reported result 10.8% Individual claims	A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data Original source ↗ Quoted verbatim, same location: "SVM rejection, scmapcell, and scPred assigned 1.5%, 4.2%, and 10.8% of the cells, respectively, as unlabeled while SVM (without rejection) classified 100% of the cells with a median F1-score of 0.98 (Fig. 1b)." Fig. 1b, scPred row. Version: 10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z; published article XML Retrieved: 2026-10-06T23:28:54Z	source checked automated source review · 2026-10-06T23:28:54Z author reported Audit details Source-backed primary-text transcription of Abdelaal et al. 2019 (Genome Biology). Re-fetched directly from Europe PMC at 2026-10-06T23:28:54Z (this review pass; not the earlier bounded-window estimate), byte-identical to the already-cached copy (SHA-256 unchanged), and archived as a committed artifact at data/omics/use-case-coverage-20261006/research/artifacts/abdelaal-2019-pmc6734286-fulltext.xml.gz. No new model execution, independent experimental replication, or qualified human scientific review. Field: `attributes.printed_value` Source artifact SHA-256: `Not recorded` Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record Inspected artifact

All evidence (CSV)All evidence (JSONL)How to read the evidence

Sources and history

View linked audit checks and correction history

Release 2026-10-06-161b59a1d02c · Record review: source checked

1 source records and release history

A comparison of automatic cell identification methods for single-cell RNA sequencing data · Original source · 10.1186/s13059-019-1795-z; published article XML

Download this release

Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: ucc-research-result-abdelaal-baron-human-scpred-unlabeled

metric: pct-unlabeled
metric direction: unknown
unit: percent
printed value: 10.8%
numeric value: 10.8
source locator: Quoted verbatim, same location: "SVM rejection, scmapcell, and scPred assigned 1.5%, 4.2%, and 10.8% of the cells, respectively, as unlabeled while SVM (without rejection) classified 100% of the cells with a median F1-score of 0.98 (Fig. 1b)." Fig. 1b, scPred row.
uncertainty: Not reported
review: method: automated_source_review; actor: Claude Sonnet cell-type-annotation-transfer evidence-research worker; reviewed at: 2026-10-06T23:28:54Z; note: Source-backed primary-text transcription of Abdelaal et al. 2019 (Genome Biology). Re-fetched directly from Europe PMC at 2026-10-06T23:28:54Z (this review pass; not the earlier bounded-window estimate), byte-identical to the already-cached copy (SHA-256 unchanged), and archived as a committed artifact at data/omics/use-case-coverage-20261006/research/artifacts/abdelaal-2019-pmc6734286-fulltext.xml.gz. No new model execution, independent experimental replication, or qualified human scientific review.
scope note: Intra-dataset (same single dataset, stratified 5-fold CV); NOT cross-study or cross-platform. See ucc-research-protocol-abdelaal-baron-human-intra for scope. Percentage of cells left unlabeled is a coverage/rejection-rate figure, not a performance metric with a universal better/worse direction: it must be read jointly with this classifier's own median F1-score (an explicit F1/rejection tradeoff), not in isolation. metric_direction is "unknown" per the schema's higher/lower/unknown contract.

Related records

evaluation: abdelaal baron human scpred

Suggest a correction