Parsing Nucleic Acid Pseudoknotted Secondary Structure: Algorithm and Applications
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
Accurate prediction of pseudoknotted nucleic acid secondary structure is an important computational challenge. Prediction algorithms based on dynamic programming aim to find a structure with minimum free energy according to some thermodynamic ("sum of loop energies") model that is implicit in the recurrences of the algorithm. However, a clear definition of what exactly are the loops in pseudoknotted structures, and their associated energies, has been lacking. In this work, we present a complete classification of loops in pseudoknotted nucleic secondary structures, and describe the Rivas and Eddy and other energy models as sum-of-loops energy models. We give a linear time algorithm for parsing a pseudoknotted secondary structure into its component loops. We give two applications of our parsing algorithm. The first is a linear time algorithm to calculate the free energy of a pseudoknotted secondary structure. This is useful for heuristic prediction algorithms, which are widely used since (pseudoknotted) RNA secondary structure prediction is NP-hard. The second application is a linear time algorithm to test the generality of the dynamic programming algorithm of Akutsu for secondary structure prediction. Together with previous work, we use this algorithm to compare the generality of state-of-the-art algorithms on real biological structures.
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