MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2160826159 · doi:10.1109/cibcb.2008.4675754

A hybrid clustering/evolutionary algorithm for RNA folding

2008· article· en· W2160826159 on OpenAlexaff
Kay C. Wiese, A. Hendriks

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRNACentroidCluster analysisAlgorithmNucleic acid secondary structureEnergy minimizationFolding (DSP implementation)Protein structure predictionComputer scienceNucleic acid structureCluster (spacecraft)Biological systemStatistical physicsProtein structureArtificial intelligencePhysicsChemistryComputational chemistryBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RNA is central in several stages of protein synthesis, and also has structural, functional, and regulatory roles in the cell. The shape of organic molecules such as RNA largely determines their function within an organic system, thus methods for the computational prediction of structure are sought after. In the ab initio case where only the RNA sequence is known, the currently dominant structure prediction techniques employ minimization of the free energy of a given RNA molecule via a thermodynamic model. However, the minimum free energy structure is rarely the native structure; this is thought to be due to errors in the thermodynamic model parameters, which are experimentally determined. Cluster analysis performed by [6] on a sampling of structures from a Boltzmann weighted ensemble determined that the best cluster centroid had an improved sensitivity and significantly improved positive predictive value over the minimum free energy structure in the ensemble. Based on this result, we investigated the combination of an existing evolutionary algorithm for RNA secondary structure prediction with a clustering algorithm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→