MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1905128537 · doi:10.5376/cmb.2013.03.0004

Predicting Long Non-coding RNAs Based on Genomic Sequence Information

2013· article· en· W1905128537 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Molecular Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational biologyCoding (social sciences)Sequence (biology)BiologyGeneticsComputer scienceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The binary classification of coding and non-coding genes is simplified near to 50 years. Genome-wide transcriptome studies have revealed that there exist tens of thousands of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), while the functions are being uncovered slowly. Accurate identification of lncRNAs is the initial step to the systematic characterization of lncRNAs. The diversity of transcription patterns for lncRNAs challenges the available non-coding RNA prediction algorithms. Until now, prediction of lncRNAs mostly relies on genomic sequence and cross-species alignment information. Here, we introduce the main strategies that can discriminate lncRNA from protein-coding transcripts. Especially, recently available machine learning algorithms are shown efficient to the rapid and accurate identification of lncRNAs from a large number of putative lncRNAs based on transcriptome assembled transcripts, which would provide the basis of understanding of lncRNA biology.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.270 · 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