IncMD: Incremental trie-based structural motif discovery algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discovery of common RNA secondary structure motifs is an important problem in bioinformatics. The presence of such motifs is usually associated with key biological functions. However, the identification of structural motifs is far from easy. Unlike motifs in sequences, which have conserved bases, structural motifs have common structure arrangements even if the underlying sequences are different. Over the past few years, hundreds of algorithms have been published for the discovery of sequential motifs, while less work has been done for the structural motifs case. Current structural motif discovery algorithms are limited in terms of accuracy and scalability. In this paper, we present an incremental and scalable algorithm for discovering RNA secondary structure motifs, namely IncMD. We consider the structural motif discovery as a frequent pattern mining problem and tackle it using a modified a priori algorithm. IncMD uses data structures, trie-based linked lists of prefixes (LLP), to accelerate the search and retrieval of patterns, support counting, and candidate generation. We modify the candidate generation step in order to adapt it to the RNA secondary structure representation. IncMD constructs the frequent patterns incrementally from RNA secondary structure basic elements, using nesting and joining operations. The notion of a motif group is introduced in order to simulate an alignment of motifs that only differ in the number of unpaired bases. In addition, we use a cluster beam approach to select motifs that will survive to the next iterations of the search. Results indicate that IncMD can perform better than some of the available structural motif discovery algorithms in terms of sensitivity (Sn), positive predictive value (PPV), and specificity (Sp). The empirical results also show that the algorithm is scalable and runs faster than all of the compared algorithms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".