MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063328956 · doi:10.1142/9789812776136_0007

COMPARING SEQUENCE AND EXPRESSION FOR PREDICTING microRNA TARGETS USING GenMiR3

2007· article· en· W2063328956 on OpenAlexaff
Jong‐Chin Huang, Brendan J. Frey, Quaid Morris

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Sequence (biology)microRNAComputational biologyFeature (linguistics)AnnotationComputer scienceGene ontologyExpression (computer science)Artificial intelligenceConsistency (knowledge bases)Gene expressionGeneBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new model and learning algorithm, GenMiR3, which takes into account mRNA sequence features in addition to paired mRNA and miRNA expression profiles when scoring candidate miRNA-mRNA interactions. We evaluate three candidate sequence features for predicting miRNA targets by assessing the expression support for the predictions of each feature and the consistency of Gene Ontology Biological Process annotation of their target sets. We consider as sequence features the total energy of hybridization between the microRNA and target, conservation of the target site and the context score which is a composite of five individual sequence features. We demonstrate that only the total energy of hybridization is predictive of paired miRNA and mRNA expression data and Gene Ontology enrichment but this feature adds little to the total accuracy of GenMiR3 predictions using for expression features alone.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations40
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207