MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010385783 · doi:10.1002/wrna.1121

Computational approaches to discovering noncoding RNA

2012· review· en· W2010385783 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews - RNA · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNon-coding RNAComputational biologyRNABiologymicroRNAGenomicsPiwi-interacting RNAGenomeGeneticsRNA interferenceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New developments are being brought to the field of molecular biology with the mounting evidence that RNA transcripts not translated into protein (noncoding RNAs, ncRNAs) hold a variety of biological functions. Computational discovery of ncRNAs is one of these developments, fueled not only by the urge to characterize these sequences but also by necessity to prioritize ones with the most relevant functions for experimental verification. The heterogeneity in size and mode of activity of ncRNAs is reflected in the corresponding diversity of computational methods for their study. Sequence and structural analysis, conservation across species, and relative position to other genomic elements are being used for ncRNA detection. In addition, the recent development of techniques that allow deep sequencing of cell transcripts either globally or from isolated ncRNA-related material is leading the field toward increased use of such high-throughput data. We expect that imminent breakthroughs will include the classification of newer types of ncRNA and new insights into miRNA and piRNA biology, eventually leading toward the completion of a catalog of all human ncRNAs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.159 · 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