<tt>incaRNAfbinv</tt>: a web server for the fragment-based design of RNA sequences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, new methods for computational RNA design have been developed and applied to various problems in synthetic biology and nanotechnology. Lately, there is considerable interest in incorporating essential biological information when solving the inverse RNA folding problem. Correspondingly, RNAfbinv aims at including biologically meaningful constraints and is the only program to-date that performs a fragment-based design of RNA sequences. In doing so it allows the design of sequences that do not necessarily exactly fold into the target, as long as the overall coarse-grained tree graph shape is preserved. Augmented by the weighted sampling algorithm of incaRNAtion, our web server called incaRNAfbinv implements the method devised in RNAfbinv and offers an interactive environment for the inverse folding of RNA using a fragment-based design approach. It takes as input: a target RNA secondary structure; optional sequence and motif constraints; optional target minimum free energy, neutrality and GC content. In addition to the design of synthetic regulatory sequences, it can be used as a pre-processing step for the detection of novel natural occurring RNAs. The two complementary methodologies RNAfbinv and incaRNAtion are merged together and fully implemented in our web server incaRNAfbinv, available at http://www.cs.bgu.ac.il/incaRNAfbinv.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.080 | 0.047 |
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".