Novel and Efficient RNA Secondary Structure Prediction Using Hierarchical Folding
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Algorithms for prediction of RNA secondary structure-the set of base pairs that form when an RNA molecule folds-are valuable to biologists who aim to understand RNA structure and function. Improving the accuracy and efficiency of prediction methods is an ongoing challenge, particularly for pseudoknotted secondary structures, in which base pairs overlap. This challenge is biologically important, since pseudoknotted structures play essential roles in functions of many RNA molecules, such as splicing and ribosomal frameshifting. State-of-the-art methods, which are based on free energy minimization, have high run-time complexity (typically Theta(n(5)) or worse), and can handle (minimize over) only limited types of pseudoknotted structures. We propose a new approach for prediction of pseudoknotted structures, motivated by the hypothesis that RNA structures fold hierarchically, with pseudoknot-free (non-overlapping) base pairs forming first, and pseudoknots forming later so as to minimize energy relative to the folded pseudoknot-free structure. Our HFold algorithm uses two-phase energy minimization to predict hierarchically formed secondary structures in O(n(3)) time, matching the complexity of the best algorithms for pseudoknot-free secondary structure prediction via energy minimization. Our algorithm can handle a wide range of biological structures, including kissing hairpins and nested kissing hairpins, which have previously required Theta(n(6)) time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it