MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038036511 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkl123

FootPrinter3: phylogenetic footprinting in partially alignable sequences

2006· article· en· W2038036511 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Fang Fang, M. Blanchette

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyFootprintingPhylogenetic treeComputational biologyGeneticsConserved sequencePhylogeneticsEvolutionary biologyGenomeDNA footprintingVertebrateTranscription factorGenePeptide sequenceDNA-binding protein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FootPrinter3 is a web server for predicting transcription factor binding sites by using phylogenetic footprinting. Until now, phylogenetic footprinting approaches have been based either on multiple alignment analysis (e.g. PhyloVista, PhastCons), or on motif-discovery algorithms (e.g. FootPrinter2). FootPrinter3 integrates these two approaches, making use of local multiple sequence alignment blocks when those are available and reliable, but also allowing finding motifs in unalignable regions. The result is a set of predictions that joins the advantages of alignment-based methods (good specificity) to those of motif-based methods (good sensitivity, even in the presence of highly diverged species). FootPrinter3 is thus a tool of choice to exploit the wealth of vertebrate genomes being sequenced, as it allows taking full advantage of the sequences of highly diverged species (e.g. chicken, zebrafish), as well as those of more closely related species (e.g. mammals). The FootPrinter3 web server is available at: http://www.mcb.mcgill.ca/~blanchem/FootPrinter3.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.024

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations26
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207