Loading…
Milestone map
3 milestones
Define question and select public dataset
1–2 weeks
Choose a specific biological question addressable through computational analysis, select an appropriate public dataset from a free repository, and document your rationale. Accessible alternative: all three milestones of this outcome can use public data — no wet-lab access is required. Real-world bioinformatics is largely computational work on existing sequencing data.
Proof required
Submit a written project proposal (1–2 pages) stating your biological question, the public dataset you have selected (include the NCBI/Ensembl/GBIF accession number or URL), your rationale for choosing it, and the analysis tool or pipeline you plan to use. Confirm the dataset has been downloaded and passes initial quality checks.
What gets checked
Common mistakes
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
Masteryfor the dedicated
What a verifier looks for
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Execute pipeline and document QC decisions
2–4 weeks depending on pipeline complexity
Run your analysis pipeline from raw or preprocessed data through to initial results, documenting every quality control decision along the way. The documented QC decisions — not just the output figures — are what distinguish a genuine computational biology project from an AI-generated one.
Proof required
Submit your analysis code or Galaxy workflow, a QC report documenting the decisions made at each step (why reads were trimmed at a specific quality threshold, why a reference genome version was chosen, how outlier samples were handled), and at least one preliminary results figure with an interpretation.
What gets checked
Common mistakes
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
Masteryfor the dedicated
What a verifier looks for
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Present findings with methodology Q&A
2–3 weeks to write up and schedule review
Present your completed analysis to a bioinformatician or computational biologist who will ask methodological follow-up questions. The documented Q&A session is the proof standard that distinguishes genuine computational reasoning from AI-generated output — an informed reviewer will present scenarios you cannot have anticipated.
Proof required
Submit your final analysis write-up (methods, results, interpretation, limitations — 3–5 pages) and a written record of your Q&A session with the reviewer: the specific questions they asked about your methodological choices and your responses. The reviewer must be named and their relevant background stated.
What gets checked
Common mistakes
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Part of