MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053500637 · doi:10.1142/s012906570900180x

ADAPTIVE MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUE FOR PERIODICITY DETECTION IN BIOLOGICAL SEQUENCES

2009· article· en· W2053500637 on OpenAlexaff
Faraz Rasheed, Mohammed Alshalalfa, Reda Alhajj

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Neural Systems · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstringChromatinNucleosomeComputer scienceSequence (biology)Suffix treeHistoneDNADNA sequencingAlgorithmSliding window protocolComputational biologyNoise (video)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)BiologyGeneticsWindow (computing)Data structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers devoted considerable effort to detect the periodicity in DNA sequences, namely, the DNA segments that wrap the Histone protein. It is anticipated that periodic dinucleotide signals are indicators of certain important spots (like binding regions) within a DNA sequence; they are equally spaced along nucleosomal DNA with approximately 10 base-pair period. Positioned nucleosomes are believed to play an important role in transcriptional regulation and for the organization of chromatin in cell nuclei. In this paper, we describe and apply a dynamic periodicity detection algorithm to discover the periodicity of certain dinucleotides in DNA and Protein sequences. Our algorithm is based on suffix tree as the underlying data structure. The proposed approach is suitable to analyze different kinds of data and can serve different targets. It considers the periodicity of alternative substrings like the three dinucleotides AA/TA/TT, in addition to considering dynamic window to detect the periodicity of certain instances of substrings. We tested the applicability, effectiveness and resilience of the proposed approach to noise as compared to the other existing algorithms described in the literature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Neural SystemsSame topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207