rewire.itbenchmarks
Task

Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer

Cross-dataset response prediction evaluates transfer across batches, drugs, tumors and patients.

SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions

2 evaluations · 2 results

Overview

Datasets

Twelve scRNA-seq datasets organized into four transfer scenarios and multiple source-to-target tasks.

Metrics

Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.

Allowed inputs

Source and target single-cell expression representations.

SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
Evaluation procedure diagram
How it worksComputational evaluation flow
Computational evaluation flow1. Input: Source and target single-cell expression representations.. Then: 2. Evaluation: The paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison.. Then: 3. Readout: Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.Computational evaluation flow1. Input: Source and target single-cell expression representations.. Then: 2. Evaluation: The paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison.. Then: 3. Readout: Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.Computational evaluation flow1. Input: Source and target single-cell expression representations.. Then: 2. Evaluation: The paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison.. Then: 3. Readout: Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.

Conceptual summary of the cited evaluation; exact task configuration and source version remain part of the protocol.

SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions; Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2

Source reviewed · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. All specifications and missing details

Results

Results are available, but no reviewed comparison panel is linked in this release.

All evaluations

2 evaluations · 2 results. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.

Filter evaluations

Applied filters: All linked evaluations

Exact evaluated configurations and original reported results
Tested configurationProtocol and datasetFindingEvidence and details
Configuration: scXDRTask: Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer
Dataset: scXDR transfer scenario 2
0.825 AUC
unitless · unknown

Uncertainty: ± 0.1573 standard deviation

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Author-reported evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

scXDR: Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer

Single-cell-to-single-cell transfer; source scenario 2.

Aggregation: Not reported

scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Table 2, scXDR row, Scenario 2 column
Configuration: scVITask: Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer
Dataset: scXDR transfer scenario 2
0.697 AUC
unitless · unknown

Uncertainty: ± 0.2463 standard deviation

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Independent external evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

scVI: Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer

Single-cell-to-single-cell transfer; source scenario 2.

Aggregation: Not reported

scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Table 2, scVI row, Scenario 2 column

Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220.

Methods and evaluation design

Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations

How it works

Evaluation methodology

Twelve scRNA-seq datasets organized into four transfer scenarios and multiple source-to-target tasks. The paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison. Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described. Bulk-transfer scDEAL, SCAD, CaDRReS-Sc and DREEP plus conventional MLP/SVM/correlation references; single-cell transfer comparators form another comparison group. Training and evaluation transfer between datasets, drugs, tumors or patients as listed in Supplementary Table S2. Table S11 excludes drug–cell relations from the representation graph’s listed relation types. These controls do not by themselves establish an audit of target-label use during every adaptation or hyperparameter-selection step.

Sources (2)scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning; scxdr-2026__42003_2025_9418_MOESM1_ESM.pdf · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions; Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2; Supplementary Tables S2 and S11

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

Strengths and limitations

Strengths supported by sources

No source-reviewed explanatory claims are recorded here yet.

Limitations and conditions

Profile review details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Stable record: reported-task-167f08013c270e

Specifications

Inputs, training, access and other details

Explanatory profile: source reviewed · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. Review applies to the cited claims; unresolved fields are listed below. Numerical results retain their own review status.

Data, procedure and scoring
PropertyDescription and evidence
DatasetsTwelve scRNA-seq datasets organized into four transfer scenarios and multiple source-to-target tasks.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
SplitsThe paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2
MetricsCell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
BaselinesBulk-transfer scDEAL, SCAD, CaDRReS-Sc and DREEP plus conventional MLP/SVM/correlation references; single-cell transfer comparators form another comparison group.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
Leakage controlsTraining and evaluation transfer between datasets, drugs, tumors or patients as listed in Supplementary Table S2. Table S11 excludes drug–cell relations from the representation graph’s listed relation types. These controls do not by themselves establish an audit of target-label use during every adaptation or hyperparameter-selection step.
Sources (2)scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning; scxdr-2026__42003_2025_9418_MOESM1_ESM.pdf · Supplementary Tables S2 and S11
UncertaintyTransfer-scenario comparisons report mean and standard deviation; variation across source/target tasks must not be interpreted as an individual-cell confidence interval.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
Entity typePaper-specific computational evaluation protocol.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
OrganismsHuman (Homo sapiens). The nine GEO accessions listed in Supplementary Table S1, including the repeated patient/drug subsets of GSE147326, all identify their sample organism as Homo sapiens (taxon 9606).
Sources (10)scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning; GSE134839.soft; GSE149214.soft; GSE108394.soft; GSE164614.soft; GSE230538.soft; GSE117872.soft; GSE127298.soft; GSE140440.soft; GSE147326.soft · Supplementary Table S1; GEO Series_sample_organism and Series_sample_taxid fields
AssaysSingle-cell drug-response measurements.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
Allowed inputsSource and target single-cell expression representations.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions
AdaptationCross-dataset transfer; exact target-label access must be distinguished by transfer scenario.
SourcesscXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning · Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions

Evidence

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

Papers and result coverage

Last literature check: 2026-09-17. Primary-paper discovery and source inspection. Source-checked results are not independently reproduced experiments.

Paper or primary resourceVersionReference
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learningPMC archival version PMC12859067.1Read source
DOI: 10.1038/s42003-025-09418-5
Historical gaps recorded on 2026-09-17

The catalogue now holds 2 result rows for this benchmark. A note below about pending extraction describes the state on 2026-09-17 and may since have been answered by a later batch. The result rows and their sources are the current record.

  • Keep bulk and single-cell settings explicit; do not call this feature-unseen inductive transfer.
  • Standard deviations are printed; resolve exact aggregation population from scenario-level source data before attaching seed-count error bars.
Search and extraction details

primary comparison table screened

Searches

  • "scXDR" cross dataset drug response

Evidence locations

  • Tables 1–2
  • Discussion: cross-dataset scenarios and target-label access
  • Methods

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.

38 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Diagram caption
Conceptual summary of the cited evaluation; exact task configuration and source version remain part of the protocol.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions; Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.caption

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Diagram steps
  • Input: Source and target single-cell expression representations.
  • Evaluation: The paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison.
  • Readout: Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions; Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.steps

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Diagram title
Computational evaluation flow
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions; Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.title

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Datasets
Twelve scRNA-seq datasets organized into four transfer scenarios and multiple source-to-target tasks.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.0.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Splits
The paper defines 20 cross-dataset transfers across batch, drug, tumor and patient scenarios. Comparator protocols differ: scVI/ComBat combine corrected datasets before a train/test partition, whereas transfer methods retain source/target roles. The exact per-task split must accompany any comparison.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; Comparison experiments at the individual cell level; Supplementary Table S2

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.1.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Adaptation
Cross-dataset transfer; exact target-label access must be distinguished by transfer scenario.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.10.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Metrics
Cell-group accuracy averages within-cluster prediction accuracy; a separate malignant-cell-group accuracy is also described.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.2.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Baselines
Bulk-transfer scDEAL, SCAD, CaDRReS-Sc and DREEP plus conventional MLP/SVM/correlation references; single-cell transfer comparators form another comparison group.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.3.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Leakage controls
Training and evaluation transfer between datasets, drugs, tumors or patients as listed in Supplementary Table S2. Table S11 excludes drug–cell relations from the representation graph’s listed relation types. These controls do not by themselves establish an audit of target-label use during every adaptation or hyperparameter-selection step.
Individual claims
scxdr-2026__42003_2025_9418_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

Original source ↗

Supplementary Tables S2 and S11

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Retrieved 2026-09-16; sha256:ad53da81235ba47f762c93ac5140108241b857160d978c63ff934e8e57283758
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T21:05:58.741824+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.4.value

Source artifact SHA-256: ad53da81235ba47f762c93ac5140108241b857160d978c63ff934e8e57283758

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Archive member: 42003_2025_9418_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

Inspected artifact

Leakage controls
Training and evaluation transfer between datasets, drugs, tumors or patients as listed in Supplementary Table S2. Table S11 excludes drug–cell relations from the representation graph’s listed relation types. These controls do not by themselves establish an audit of target-label use during every adaptation or hyperparameter-selection step.
Individual claims
scXDR: drug response prediction across single-cell datasets via heterogeneous network transfer learning

Original source ↗

Supplementary Tables S2 and S11

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: PMC archival version PMC12859067.1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:33:50.056Z

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Targeted full-paper and supplement review of the outstanding task fields, with original dataset metadata checked where accessible. Source-scoped omissions are explicit; no independent benchmark reproduction or numerical-result change.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.4.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 47b5925e9887d87fc8288d29288802b1d67d54f064d913151df92171f7c68d33

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Sources and history

View linked audit checks and correction history

Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220 · Record review: needs review

12 source records and release historyDownload this release
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: reported-task-167f08013c270e

areas
cells-tissues
tasks
Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer
entity level
task
version
Not reported
task
Cross-dataset single-cell drug response transfer
scope note
Paper-specific evaluation task; protocol completeness requires further extraction.
benchmark research
review date: 2026-09-17; status: primary_comparison_table_screened; primary sources: expansion-p3-scxdr-2026; inspected locators: Tables 1–2; Discussion: cross-dataset scenarios and target-label access; Methods; searched queries: "scXDR" cross dataset drug response; gaps: Keep bulk and single-cell settings explicit; do not call this feature-unseen inductive transfer.; Standard deviations are printed; resolve exact aggregation population from scenario-level source data before attaching seed-count error bars.; claim scope: Primary-paper discovery and source inspection. Source-checked results are not independently reproduced experiments.
historical missing metadata
protocol version: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; split: not_reported_in_legacy_extract
metadata review scope
historical_missing_metadata preserves the original discovery state. Current descriptive evidence and missingness are recorded in profile.facts; numerical-result review is separate.
legacy kinds
benchmark
entity classification
review date: 2026-09-17; rationale: This source-scoped record identifies the biological prediction task and holds its paper context. Preserve the existing task identity; exact split, model adaptation and scoring remain in linked evaluations or separate protocol records.; source ids: scxdr-2026; source locator: Methods: Data collection and processing; group-level evaluation; cached text lines 55–57, 84–86; uncertainty/repeat-run/statistical-comparison passages; matching task comparison table/ablation captions; ambiguities: A paper- or suite-specific task may constrain some inputs or metrics; that alone does not make it interchangeable with a complete versioned protocol. No protocol equivalence is inferred.; Some legacy profile Entity type facts use the generic phrase computational evaluation protocol. That boilerplate is not sufficient to establish a single fixed protocol identity or to merge this task with another protocol record.
Related records

Suggest a correction