A partition function algorithm for interacting nucleic acid strands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Recent interests, such as RNA interference and antisense RNA regulation, strongly motivate the problem of predicting whether two nucleic acid strands interact. MOTIVATION: Regulatory non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) such as microRNAs play an important role in gene regulation. Studies on both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells show that such ncRNAs usually bind to their target mRNA to regulate the translation of corresponding genes. The specificity of these interactions depends on the stability of intermolecular and intramolecular base pairing. While methods like deep sequencing allow to discover an ever increasing set of ncRNAs, there are no high-throughput methods available to detect their associated targets. Hence, there is an increasing need for precise computational target prediction. In order to predict base-pairing probability of any two bases in interacting nucleic acids, it is necessary to compute the interaction partition function over the whole ensemble. The partition function is a scalar value from which various thermodynamic quantities can be derived. For example, the equilibrium concentration of each complex nucleic acid species and also the melting temperature of interacting nucleic acids can be calculated based on the partition function of the complex. RESULTS: We present a model for analyzing the thermodynamics of two interacting nucleic acid strands considering the most general type of interactions studied in the literature. We also present a corresponding dynamic programming algorithm that computes the partition function over (almost) all physically possible joint secondary structures formed by two interacting nucleic acids in O(n(6)) time. We verify the predictive power of our algorithm by computing (i) the melting temperature for interacting RNA pairs studied in the literature and (ii) the equilibrium concentration for several variants of the OxyS-fhlA complex. In both experiments, our algorithm shows high accuracy and outperforms competitors. AVAILABILITY: Software and web server is available at http://compbio.cs.sfu.ca/taverna/pirna/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are avaliable 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".