MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prediction of genetic structure in eukaryotic DNA using reference point logistic regression and sequence alignment

2000· article· en· W2122270525 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Hooper, Haiyan Zhang, David S. Wishart

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionSequence (biology)Computer sciencePoint (geometry)Computational biologyDNAStatisticsBiologyGeneticsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Current software tools are moderately effective in predicting genetic structure (exons, introns, intergenic regions, and complete genes) from raw DNA sequence data. Improvements in accuracy and speed are needed to deal with the increasing volume of data from large scale sequencing projects. RESULTS: We present a two-stage computer program to predict genetic structure in eukaryotic DNA. The first stage makes use of a novel statistical technique, called reference point logistic (RPL) regression, to calculate scores for potential functional sites. These site scores are combined with interval content, length, and state scores, via a Generalized Hidden Markov Model, to determine a combined score for each possible parse of a given DNA sequence into exons, introns, and intergenic regions. An optimal parse is found using a dynamic programming algorithm. In the second stage, protein sequence alignment methods are applied to improve the accuracy of the initial parse. Computation in the first stage of the program is very fast (1 s on a 360 MHz CPU for a 16 kb sequence) and its predictive accuracy typically matches or exceeds the best results reported for other methods (Sensitivity = 0.93 and Specificity = 0.93 for the Burset/Guigótest set). Computation in the second stage is slower, but the final predictions are more accurate (Sn = 0.97, Sp = 0.97). The program (called GRPL) can handle partial, single, and multi-gene sequences. The program is also capable of predicting the genetic structure of vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant DNA with nearly equal accuracy. Statistical techniques have also been introduced to model the effects of varying C+G content in a continuous manner and to control overfitting of parameters for smaller training sets. AVAILABILITY: An academic implementation of GRPL, compiled for SUN workstations, is available by anonymous ftp from snipe.pharmacy. ualberta.ca/pub. The training and test sets used in this work, together with supplementary material, can be found at the same location. A commercial implementation is available as a component of GeneTool (BioTools Inc., http://biotools.com).

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations19
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207