MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964502706 · doi:10.1137/s0097539701397825

Genetic Design of Drugs Without Side-Effects

2003· article· en· W1964502706 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaotie Deng, Guojun Li, Zimao Li, Bin Ma, Lusheng Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Computing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCity University of Hong Kong
KeywordsComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consider two sets of strings, ${\cal B}$ (bad genes) and ${\cal G}$ (good genes), as well as two integers $d_b$ and $d_g$ ($d_b\leq d_g$). A frequently occurring problem in computational biology (and other fields) is to find a (distinguishing) substring s of length L that distinguishes the bad strings from good strings, i.e., such that for each string $s_i\in {\cal B}$ there exists a length-L substring ti of si with $d(s, t_i)\leq d_b$ (close to bad strings), and for every substring ui of length L of every string $g_i\in {\cal G}$, $d(s, u_i)\geq d_g$ (far from good strings). We present a polynomial time approximation scheme to settle the problem; i.e., for any constant $\epsilon >0$, the algorithm finds a string s of length L such that for every $s_i\in {\cal B}$ there is a length-L substring ti of si with $d(t_i, s)\leq (1+\epsilon) d_b$, and for every substring ui of length L of every $g_i\in {\cal G}$, $d(u_i, s)\geq (1-\epsilon) d_g$ if a solution to the original pair ($d_b\leq d_g$) exists. Since there is a polynomial number of such pairs $(d_b,d_g)$, we can exhaust all the possibilities in polynomial time to find a good approximation required by the corresponding application problems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations72
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on ComputingSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207