MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122246788 · doi:10.1093/nar/gki812

A thermodynamic approach to designing structure-free combinatorial DNA word sets

2005· article· en· W2122246788 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael R. Shortreed, Sheng Chang, David S. Hong, Margaret Phillips, B. Campion, Dan Tulpan, Mirela Andronescu, Anne Condon, Holger H. Hoos, Lloyd M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of OxfordNational Science Foundation
KeywordsWord (group theory)BiologyDNATandemDuplex (building)DNA sequencingBase sequenceNucleic acid thermodynamicsComputational biologyGeneticsBiological systemMathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An algorithm is presented for the generation of sets of non-interacting DNA sequences, employing existing thermodynamic models for the prediction of duplex stabilities and secondary structures. A DNA 'word' structure is employed in which individual DNA 'words' of a given length (e.g. 12mer and 16mer) may be concatenated into longer sequences (e.g. four tandem words and six tandem words). This approach, where multiple word variants are used at each tandem word position, allows very large sets of non-interacting DNA strands to be assembled from combinations of the individual words. Word sets were generated and their figures of merit are compared to sets as described previously in the literature (e.g. 4, 8, 12, 15 and 16mer). The predicted hybridization behavior was experimentally verified on selected members of the sets using standard UV hyperchromism measurements of duplex melting temperatures (T(m)s). Additional experimental validation was obtained by using the sequences in formulating and solving a small example of a DNA computing problem.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations44
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207