Predicting Coding Potential from Genome Sequence: Application to Betaherpesviruses Infecting Rats and Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prediction of protein-coding regions and other features of primary DNA sequence have greatly contributed to experimental biology. Significant challenges remain in genome annotation methods, including the identification of small or overlapping genes and the assessment of mRNA splicing or unconventional translation signals in expression. We have employed a combined analysis of compositional biases and conservation together with frame-specific G+C representation to reevaluate and annotate the genome sequences of mouse and rat cytomegaloviruses. Our analysis predicts that there are at least 34 protein-coding regions in these genomes that were not apparent in earlier annotation efforts. These include 17 single-exon genes, three new exons of previously identified genes, a newly identified four-exon gene for a lectin-like protein (in rat cytomegalovirus), and 10 probable frameshift extensions of previously annotated genes. This expanded set of candidate genes provides an additional basis for investigation in cytomegalovirus biology and pathogenesis.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".