Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy
human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy. Scored with Accuracy on human_ocr_ensembl. The paper's own three-layer convolutional baseline, trained on each dataset's training split and scored on its test split. Architecture is in Table 1.
Overview
human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy. Scored with Accuracy on human_ocr_ensembl. The paper's own three-layer convolutional baseline, trained on each dataset's training split and scored on its test split. Architecture is in Table 1.
Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.
Results
Each comparison retains its reviewed evaluation scope, dataset and metric. Results are shown without a pooled ranking.
Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy
accuracy (percent) · Higher values are better.
Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy · human_ocr_ensembl (Genomic Benchmarks split)
Evidence origin: Author-reported evaluation.
Genomic benchmarks: a collection of datasets for genomic sequence classification · Table 2, row(human_ocr_ensembl)- Both columns are the same baseline architecture in two frameworks, not two competing models.
- These are the paper's reference baselines, not a leaderboard of the best available models.
Comparison details and limitations
Every method Genomic Benchmarks reports on human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy, scored with Accuracy on human_ocr_ensembl.
- Author-reported numbers, source checked but not independently reproduced.
Automated source review: 2026-09-18. Numerical source review does not establish independent reproduction.
Dots show point estimates. Whiskers show only explicitly defined uncertainty (standard deviation, standard error or a labelled interval); their definitions remain in Table. Unresolved uncertainty is not plotted. Differences do not establish statistical significance.
Showing 2 of 2 matching rows.
Methods and evaluation design
Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations
Evaluation design
Benchmarks bring together tasks and protocols. A task describes the biological question; a protocol defines a particular test.
Benchmarks
These source-backed links do not make different protocols or scores interchangeable.
Recorded evaluations
Each evaluation records what was tested and under which conditions.
Run instructions
No runnable recipe has been reviewed for this task. Dataset access, model requirements, licences and compute requirements must be checked against its sources before execution.
A task describes a biological question. Choose a linked protocol to obtain concrete split and scoring instructions.
Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions
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
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|---|---|
| Relationship: part of discovery-benchmark-genomic-benchmarks Individual claims | Genomic benchmarks: a collection of datasets for genomic sequence classification Table 2, row(human_ocr_ensembl) Version: PMC10150520 | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-18 Audit detailsPrimary-source transcription with no human sign-off and no independent reproduction. Field: Claim: genomic-benchmarks-association-human-ocr-ensembl-accuracy Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Exact retrieved primary paper artifact bytes. |
Sources and history
View linked audit checks and correction history
Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220 · Record review: source checked
1 source records and release history
- Genomic benchmarks: a collection of datasets for genomic sequence classification · Original source · PMC10150520
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: genomic-benchmarks-task-human-ocr-ensembl-accuracy
- areas
- dna-genomes
- tasks
- human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy
- metric
- Accuracy
- metric direction
- higher
- dataset
- human_ocr_ensembl
- protocol
- The paper's own three-layer convolutional baseline, trained on each dataset's training split and scored on its test split. Architecture is in Table 1.
- source locator
- Table 2, row(human_ocr_ensembl)
- comparison panels
- id: genomic-benchmarks-panel-human-ocr-ensembl-accuracy; title: Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy; protocol id: genomic-benchmarks-task-human-ocr-ensembl-accuracy; dataset id: genomic-benchmarks-dataset-human-ocr-ensembl; metric: accuracy; unit: percent; direction: higher; result ids: genomic-benchmarks-result-baseline-cnn-pytorch-human-ocr-ensembl-accuracy-accuracy; genomic-benchmarks-result-baseline-cnn-tensorflow-human-ocr-ensembl-accuracy-accuracy; source ids: expansion-p3-genomic-benchmarks; source locator: Table 2, row(human_ocr_ensembl); context: Every method Genomic Benchmarks reports on human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy, scored with Accuracy on human_ocr_ensembl.; caveats: Author-reported numbers, source checked but not independently reproduced.; Both columns are the same baseline architecture in two frameworks, not two competing models.; These are the paper's reference baselines, not a leaderboard of the best available models.; review: method: automated_source_review; date: 2026-09-18
Related records
- part of: Genomic Benchmarks
- subject: Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: part of discovery-benchmark-genomic-benchmarks
- benchmark: Baseline CNN (PyTorch) on Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy
- benchmark: Baseline CNN (TensorFlow) on Genomic Benchmarks HUMAN-OCR-ENSEMBL-ACCURACY: human_ocr_ensembl, Accuracy