MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1883257889

Enhancements to hidden markov models for gene finding and other biological applications

2006· dissertation· en· W1883257889 on OpenAlexaff
Tomáš Vinař

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelComputer scienceMarkov chainMarkov modelRepresentation (politics)LimitingMachine learningBiological dataArtificial intelligenceMarkov processAlgorithmData miningBioinformaticsMathematicsBiologyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, we present enhancements of hidden Markov models for the problem of finding genes in DNA sequences. Genes are the parts of DNA that serve as a template for synthesis of proteins. Thus, gene finding is a crucial step in the analysis of DNA sequencing data. <br /><br /> Hidden Markov models are a key tool used in gene finding. Yhis thesis presents three methods for extending the capabilities of hidden Markov models to better capture the statistical properties of DNA sequences. In all three, we encounter limiting factors that lead to trade-offs between the model accuracy and those limiting factors. <br /><br /> First, we build better models for recognizing biological signals in DNA sequences. Our new models capture non-adjacent dependencies within these signals. In this case, the main limiting factor is the amount of training data: more training data allows more complex models. Second, we design methods for better representation of length distributions in hidden Markov models, where we balance the accuracy of the representation against the running time needed to find genes in novel sequences. Finally, we show that creating hidden Markov models with complex topologies may be detrimental to the prediction accuracy, unless we use more complex prediction algorithms. However, such algorithms require longer running time, and in many cases the prediction problem is NP-hard. For gene finding this means that incorporating some of the prior biological knowledge into the model would require impractical running times. However, we also demonstrate that our methods can be used for solving other biological problems, where input sequences are short. <br /><br /> As a model example to evaluate our methods, we built a gene finder ExonHunter that outperforms programs commonly used in genome projects.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207