A practical and robust sequence search strategy for structural genomics target selection
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
MOTIVATION: Target selection strategies for structural genomic projects must be able to prioritize gene regions on the basis of significant sequence similarity with proteins that have already been structurally determined. With the rapid development of protein comparison software a robust prioritization scheme should be independent of the choice of algorithm and be able to incorporate different sequence similarity thresholds. RESULTS: A robust target selection strategy has been developed that can assign a priority level to all genes in any genome. Structural assignments to genome sequences are calculated at two thresholds and six levels (1-6) describe the prioritization of all whole genes and partial gene regions. This simple two-threshold approach can be implemented with any fold recognition or homology detection algorithms. The results for 10 genomes are presented using the SSEARCH and PSI-BLAST programs. AVAILABILITY: Programs are available on request from the authors.
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