MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145429131 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkt574

DNA motif elucidation using belief propagation

2013· article· en· W2145429131 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ka‐Chun Wong, Tak-Ming Chan, Chengbin Peng, Yue Li, Zhaolei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsHidden Markov modelMotif (music)BiologyExecutableComputational biologyDNA microarrayDNAComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceGeneticsGenePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein-binding microarray (PBM) is a high-throughout platform that can measure the DNA-binding preference of a protein in a comprehensive and unbiased manner. A typical PBM experiment can measure binding signal intensities of a protein to all the possible DNA k-mers (k=8∼10); such comprehensive binding affinity data usually need to be reduced and represented as motif models before they can be further analyzed and applied. Since proteins can often bind to DNA in multiple modes, one of the major challenges is to decompose the comprehensive affinity data into multimodal motif representations. Here, we describe a new algorithm that uses Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) and can derive precise and multimodal motifs using belief propagations. We describe an HMM-based approach using belief propagations (kmerHMM), which accepts and preprocesses PBM probe raw data into median-binding intensities of individual k-mers. The k-mers are ranked and aligned for training an HMM as the underlying motif representation. Multiple motifs are then extracted from the HMM using belief propagations. Comparisons of kmerHMM with other leading methods on several data sets demonstrated its effectiveness and uniqueness. Especially, it achieved the best performance on more than half of the data sets. In addition, the multiple binding modes derived by kmerHMM are biologically meaningful and will be useful in interpreting other genome-wide data such as those generated from ChIP-seq. The executables and source codes are available at the authors' websites: e.g. http://www.cs.toronto.edu/∼wkc/kmerHMM.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations70
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207