Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reimplement slimmer functionality #144

Open
kltm opened this issue Aug 19, 2014 · 15 comments
Open

Reimplement slimmer functionality #144

kltm opened this issue Aug 19, 2014 · 15 comments
Milestone

Comments

@kltm
Copy link
Member

kltm commented Aug 19, 2014

There is still interest for online slimming functionality; the goal here is to first implement slimmer functionality with the improvements to the perl backend from #69, then move on to more interesting functionality (like defining your own cutsets using a tree browser).

@kltm kltm added this to the 2.2 milestone Aug 19, 2014
@kltm
Copy link
Member Author

kltm commented Aug 19, 2014

Tagged for 2.2 for now, if #69 ends up being nasty, may be kicked to the indefinite future or binned.

@kltm
Copy link
Member Author

kltm commented Aug 19, 2014

@cmungall may have additional commentary/requests (that may end up being separate issues).

@cmungall
Copy link
Member

I think the create-your-own-slim functionality may be best broken into its own ticket - or tagged onto a ticket for a tree browser with gene counts. The basic idea is

  1. Starting with root(s), recursively auto-open children until nodes get too specific, where this could be user defined (e.g. must have at least 1% of genes in the genome of interest)
  2. Allow user to open and close using standard tree browser functionality
  3. User clicks "save as slim". All leaf nodes are used as the slim

@kltm
Copy link
Member Author

kltm commented Aug 19, 2014

I agree, but let's keep it here for now and break it out once we start work here after #69--we'll have a better idea of performance and consequences at that point.

@kltm kltm modified the milestones: 2.3, 2.2 Jan 29, 2015
@kltm kltm modified the milestones: 2.3, 2.4 Aug 14, 2015
@kltm
Copy link
Member Author

kltm commented Nov 18, 2015

From Val:

Will the web based GO slim tool be returning at any point?
see comments in this ticket
http://jira.geneontology.org/browse/GO-1027

PomBase currently point users to
http://go.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/GOTermMapper
rather than QuickGO because it matches our output
http://www.pombase.org/browse-curation/fission-yeast-go-slim-terms

We don't want to point our users to QuickGO because the GO annotations are differently in GOA than in GO
1. We have filtered all of the annotations generated by erroneous mappings submitted to this tracker
https://github.com/geneontology/go-annotation/issues
AND

2. GOA/QuickGO filter annotations for syntax errors which are currently accepted by the
GO loading script.
geneontology/go-site#123

@kltm kltm modified the milestones: 2.4, 2.5 Mar 2, 2016
@suzialeksander
Copy link

Bumping as there was recent interest in this from Helpdesk, spawned from the "Paris" virtual Users Meeting

@kltm
Copy link
Member Author

kltm commented May 28, 2020

@suzialeksander I think this is probably not going to happen in AmiGO. Once the functionality was originally removed, we briefly had it in Galaxy (remember that?) and that never really gained traction. The API covers some of this and this is possibly better tackled via web (Jupyter) notebook or the like.

@ValWood
Copy link

ValWood commented May 29, 2020

But slimmer functionality is not so far removed from the MAtrix tool so why not provide it in the familiar AmiGO environment?

@kltm
Copy link
Member Author

kltm commented May 29, 2020

@ValWood At this point, and with many things that we'd like to do, limited resources and priorities. It may be possible to restart some of this when we start into AmiGO development again, but as it has been for the last few years (last note on ticket five years ago), we are unlikely to meet that need with our current roadmap with the current AmiGO.
That said, if there is a huge push for this, versus things like QC efforts or Noctua, then resources could be freed.

@ValWood
Copy link

ValWood commented May 29, 2020

OK. It does feel a little like the public facing and major products of GO (ontology and web tools) are a little deprioritised and starved of resources. But I guess it isn't possible to do everything

@lpalbou
Copy link
Contributor

lpalbou commented Jun 20, 2020

That's certainly something to discuss more. If we are to do more User Meetings, we'll have to improve our APIs and docs indeed.

As mentioned in the other ticket, creating a slim is a different task than mapping annotations to a set of higher level terms. The former, I don't see that happening any time soon but the later has been available for some time in the API and is used by the ribbon to create the association tables.

@ValWood
Copy link

ValWood commented Jun 20, 2020

but the later has been available for some time in the API and is used by the ribbon to create the association tables.

This isn't something the average biologist could use to slim their own lists though.
They need a web interface .We cater far too much for informaticians and not enough to lab scientists.

The slim functionality at PomBase is *really *. popular. We don't have an API, and we've never been asked to provide one (although we should), but the point is most of the GO (potential) user base would not know how to use the API, they will go elsewhere.

@lpalbou
Copy link
Contributor

lpalbou commented Jun 20, 2020

Agreed. I will try to reopen the discussion. Do you have a link to the pombase tool ? Thanks

@ValWood
Copy link

ValWood commented Jun 20, 2020

The slimmer functionality is embedded into our query tool.

https://www.pombase.org/query
You can upload any pombe gene list and slim (now using process, function, component, or disease slim)

To try it you can select a list from the commonly used queries (all disease associated genes for example).

Click on the list in the results table.
One of the "actions" at the top right of the results table is to slim your list

very quick, very easy.

@ValWood
Copy link

ValWood commented Jun 20, 2020

The 'full' slim sets are available from the front page
https://www.pombase.org/

I don't have stats for the query tool, only for the static pages.
The new disease slim, relaunched last month using MONDO has been accessed 101 times by 63 unique users since May 1st. The BP slim has been accessed 88 times by 55 users.
I imagine many many more people use the slim feature with their own queries.

Slims are really popular for people to orientate themselves with their data. For bench scientists, probably more so than enrichment tools if they are made easily avaiable, and the slim has good coverage. They can see immediately what they are dealing with and plan where to go next.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants