MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W134625690

An Approach to Selecting Putative RNA Motifs Using MDL Principle.

2006· article· en· W134625690 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Anwar, Marcel Turcotte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimum description lengthSequence (biology)Computational biologyRNARank (graph theory)BiologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsGeneticsGeneCombinatorics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—The history of molecular biology is punctuated by a series of discoveries demonstrating the surprising breadth of biological roles of ribonucleic acid (RNA). An ensemble of evolutionary related RNA sequences believed to contain signals at sequence and structure level can be exploited to detect motifs common to all or a portion of those sequences. Finding these similar structural features can provide substantial information as to which parts of the sequence are functional. For several decades, free energy minimization has been the most popular method for structure prediction. However, limitations of the free energy models as well as time complexity have prompted us to look for alternative approaches. We therefore, investigate another paradigm, minimum description length (MDL) encoding, for evaluating the significance of consensus motifs. Here, we evaluate motifs generated by Seed using the description length as a selection criteria. MDL scoring method was tested on four data sets of varying complexity. We found that the scoring method produces competing structures in comparison to the ones predicted with lowest free energy. The top rank motifs have high measures of positive predicted value to known motifs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→