A model for sequential evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment (SELEX) data
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
A Systematic Evolution of Ligands by EXponential enrichment (SELEX) experiment begins in round one with a random pool of oligonucleotides in equilibrium solution with a target. Over a few rounds, oligonucleotides having a high affinity for the target are selected. Data from a high throughput SELEX experiment consists of lists of thousands of oligonucleotides sampled after each round. Thus far, SELEX experiments have been very good at suggesting the highest affinity oligonucleotide, but modeling lower affinity recognition site variants has been difficult. Furthermore, an alignment step has always been used prior to analyzing SELEX data. We present a novel model, based on a biochemical parametrization of SELEX, which allows us to use data from all rounds to estimate the affinities of the oligonucleotides. Most notably, our model also aligns the oligonucleotides. We use our model to analyze a SELEX experiment containing double stranded DNA oligonucleotides and the transcription factor Bicoid as the target. Our SELEX model outperformed other published methods for predicting putative binding sites for Bicoid as indicated by the results of an in-vivo ChIP-chip experiment.
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