Comprehensive overview and assessment of computational prediction of microRNA targets in animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are short endogenous noncoding RNAs that bind to target mRNAs, usually resulting in degradation and translational repression. Identification of miRNA targets is crucial for deciphering functional roles of the numerous miRNAs that are rapidly generated by sequencing efforts. Computational prediction methods are widely used for high-throughput generation of putative miRNA targets. We review a comprehensive collection of 38 miRNA sequence-based computational target predictors in animals that were developed over the past decade. Our in-depth analysis considers all significant perspectives including the underlying predictive methodologies with focus on how they draw from the mechanistic basis of the miRNA-mRNA interaction. We also discuss ease of use, availability, impact of the considered predictors and the evaluation protocols that were used to assess them. We are the first to comparatively and comprehensively evaluate seven representative methods when predicting miRNA targets at the duplex and gene levels. The gene-level evaluation is based on three benchmark data sets that rely on different ways to annotate targets including biochemical assays, microarrays and pSILAC. We offer practical advice on selection of appropriate predictors according to certain properties of miRNA sequences, characteristics of a specific application and desired levels of predictive quality. We also discuss future work related to the design of new models, data quality, improved usability, need for standardized evaluation and ability to predict mRNA expression changes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".