MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1798235558

Evidence combination in hidden markov models for gene prediction

2006· dissertation· en· W1798235558 on OpenAlexaff
Broňa Brejová

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomeHidden Markov modelGene predictionProbabilistic logicAnnotationComputational biologyComputer scienceGenome projectSequence (biology)GeneMarkov chainGene AnnotationIdentification (biology)GeneticsBiologyArtificial intelligenceMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii This thesis introduces new techniques for finding genes in genomic sequences. Genes are regions of a genome encoding proteins of an organism. Identification of genes in a genome is an important step in the annotation process after a new genome is sequenced. The prediction accuracy of gene finding can be greatly improved by using experimental evidence. This evidence includes homologies between the genome and databases of known proteins, or evolutionary conservation of genomic sequence in different species. We propose a flexible framework to incorporate several different sources of such evidence into a gene finder based on a hidden Markov model. Various sources of evidence are expressed as partial probabilistic statements about the annotation of positions in the sequence, and these are combined with the hidden Markov model to obtain the final gene prediction. The opportunity to

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207