MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140505514 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btt217

A weighted sampling algorithm for the design of RNA sequences with targeted secondary structure and nucleotide distribution

2013· article· en· W2140505514 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vladimir Reinharz, Yann Ponty, Jérôme Waldispühl

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)AlgorithmNucleic acid secondary structureNucleotideComputational biologyRNADistribution (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematicsBiologyCombinatoricsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATIONS: The design of RNA sequences folding into predefined secondary structures is a milestone for many synthetic biology and gene therapy studies. Most of the current software uses similar local search strategies (i.e. a random seed is progressively adapted to acquire the desired folding properties) and more importantly do not allow the user to control explicitly the nucleotide distribution such as the GC-content in their sequences. However, the latter is an important criterion for large-scale applications as it could presumably be used to design sequences with better transcription rates and/or structural plasticity. RESULTS: In this article, we introduce IncaRNAtion, a novel algorithm to design RNA sequences folding into target secondary structures with a predefined nucleotide distribution. IncaRNAtion uses a global sampling approach and weighted sampling techniques. We show that our approach is fast (i.e. running time comparable or better than local search methods), seedless (we remove the bias of the seed in local search heuristics) and successfully generates high-quality sequences (i.e. thermodynamically stable) for any GC-content. To complete this study, we develop a hybrid method combining our global sampling approach with local search strategies. Remarkably, our glocal methodology overcomes both local and global approaches for sampling sequences with a specific GC-content and target structure. AVAILABILITY: IncaRNAtion is available at csb.cs.mcgill.ca/incarnation/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations60
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207