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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Agile parallel bioinformatics workflow management using Pwrake
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-0500-4-331 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiroyuki Mishima, Kensaku Sasaki, Masahiro Tanaka, Osamu Tatebe, Koh-ichiro Yoshiura |
| Abstract |
In bioinformatics projects, scientific workflow systems are widely used to manage computational procedures. Full-featured workflow systems have been proposed to fulfil the demand for workflow management. However, such systems tend to be over-weighted for actual bioinformatics practices. We realize that quick deployment of cutting-edge software implementing advanced algorithms and data formats, and continuous adaptation to changes in computational resources and the environment are often prioritized in scientific workflow management. These features have a greater affinity with the agile software development method through iterative development phases after trial and error.Here, we show the application of a scientific workflow system Pwrake to bioinformatics workflows. Pwrake is a parallel workflow extension of Ruby's standard build tool Rake, the flexibility of which has been demonstrated in the astronomy domain. Therefore, we hypothesize that Pwrake also has advantages in actual bioinformatics workflows. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Japan | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Cyprus | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 56 | 81% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Professor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 7 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 32% |
| Computer Science | 16 | 23% |
| Engineering | 8 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 October 2014.
All research outputs
#13,124,659
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,613
of 4,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,012
of 125,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#30
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 125,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.