RBPmotif: a web server for the discovery of sequence and structure preferences of RNA-binding proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RBPmotif web server (http://www.rnamotif.org) implements tools to identify binding preferences of RNA-binding proteins (RBPs). Given a set of sequences that are known to be bound and unbound by the RBP of interest, RBPmotif provides two types of analysis: (i) de novo motif finding when there is no a priori knowledge on RBP's binding preferences and (ii) analysis of structure preferences when there is a previously identified sequence motif for the RBP. De novo motif finding is performed with the previously published RNAcontext algorithm that learns discriminative motif models to identify both sequence and structure preferences. The results of this analysis include the inferred binding preferences of the RBP and the added predictive value of incorporating structure preferences. Second type of analysis investigates whether the instances of the previously identified sequence motif are enriched in a particular structure context in bound sequences, relative to its instances in unbound sequences. On completion, the results page shows the comparison of structure contexts of the motif instances between bound and unbound sequences and an assessment of statistical significance of detected preferences. In summary, RBPmotif web server enables the concurrent analysis of sequence and structure preferences of RBPs through a user-friendly interface.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.026 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".