↓ Skip to main content

Genome Modeling System: A Knowledge Management Platform for Genomics

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
109 tweeters
3 Facebook pages
2 Google+ users

Readers on

95 Mendeley
4 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Genome Modeling System: A Knowledge Management Platform for Genomics
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, July 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004274
Pubmed ID

Malachi Griffith, Obi L. Griffith, Scott M. Smith, Avinash Ramu, Matthew B. Callaway, Anthony M. Brummett, Michael J. Kiwala, Adam C. Coffman, Allison A. Regier, Ben J. Oberkfell, Gabriel E. Sanderson, Thomas P. Mooney, Nathaniel G. Nutter, Edward A. Belter, Feiyu Du, Robert L. Long, Travis E. Abbott, Ian T. Ferguson, David L. Morton, Mark M. Burnett, James V. Weible, Joshua B. Peck, Adam Dukes, Joshua F. McMichael, Justin T. Lolofie, Brian R. Derickson, Jasreet Hundal, Zachary L. Skidmore, Benjamin J. Ainscough, Nathan D. Dees, William S. Schierding, Cyriac Kandoth, Kyung H. Kim, Charles Lu, Christopher C. Harris, Nicole Maher, Christopher A. Maher, Vincent J. Magrini, Benjamin S. Abbott, Ken Chen, Eric Clark, Indraniel Das, Xian Fan, Amy E. Hawkins, Todd G. Hepler, Todd N. Wylie, Shawn M. Leonard, William E. Schroeder, Xiaoqi Shi, Lynn K. Carmichael, Matthew R. Weil, Richard W. Wohlstadter, Gary Stiehr, Michael D. McLellan, Craig S. Pohl, Christopher A. Miller, Daniel C. Koboldt, Jason R. Walker, James M. Eldred, David E. Larson, David J. Dooling, Li Ding, Elaine R. Mardis, Richard K. Wilson, Griffith, Malachi, Griffith, Obi L, Smith, Scott M, Ramu, Avinash, Callaway, Matthew B, Brummett, Anthony M, Kiwala, Michael J, Coffman, Adam C, Regier, Allison A, Oberkfell, Ben J, Sanderson, Gabriel E, Mooney, Thomas P, Nutter, Nathaniel G, Belter, Edward A, Du, Feiyu, Long, Robert L, Abbott, Travis E, Ferguson, Ian T, Morton, David L, Burnett, Mark M, Weible, James V, Peck, Joshua B, Dukes, Adam, McMichael, Joshua F, Lolofie, Justin T, Derickson, Brian R, Hundal, Jasreet, Skidmore, Zachary L, Ainscough, Benjamin J, Dees, Nathan D, Schierding, William S, Kandoth, Cyriac, Kim, Kyung H, Lu, Charles, Harris, Christopher C, Maher, Nicole, Maher, Christopher A, Magrini, Vincent J, Abbott, Benjamin S, Chen, Ken, Clark, Eric, Das, Indraniel, Fan, Xian, Hawkins, Amy E, Hepler, Todd G, Wylie, Todd N, Leonard, Shawn M, Schroeder, William E, Shi, Xiaoqi, Carmichael, Lynn K, Weil, Matthew R, Wohlstadter, Richard W, Stiehr, Gary, McLellan, Michael D, Pohl, Craig S, Miller, Christopher A, Koboldt, Daniel C, Walker, Jason R, Eldred, James M, Larson, David E, Dooling, David J, Ding, Li, Mardis, Elaine R, Wilson, Richard K, Paul P Gardner


In this work, we present the Genome Modeling System (GMS), an analysis information management system capable of executing automated genome analysis pipelines at a massive scale. The GMS framework provides detailed tracking of samples and data coupled with reliable and repeatable analysis pipelines. The GMS also serves as a platform for bioinformatics development, allowing a large team to collaborate on data analysis, or an individual researcher to leverage the work of others effectively within its data management system. Rather than separating ad-hoc analysis from rigorous, reproducible pipelines, the GMS promotes systematic integration between the two. As a demonstration of the GMS, we performed an integrated analysis of whole genome, exome and transcriptome sequencing data from a breast cancer cell line (HCC1395) and matched lymphoblastoid line (HCC1395BL). These data are available for users to test the software, complete tutorials and develop novel GMS pipeline configurations. The GMS is available at https://github.com/genome/gms.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 109 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 5%
United Kingdom 3 3%
Taiwan 2 2%
Spain 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 80 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 20%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Master 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Other 16 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 39%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 22%
Computer Science 11 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Unspecified 5 5%
Other 12 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2017.
All research outputs
of 10,698,678 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
of 4,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 231,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,698,678 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,551 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 231,977 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.