CAGEd-oPOSSUM: motif enrichment analysis from CAGE-derived TSSs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: With the emergence of large-scale Cap Analysis of Gene Expression (CAGE) datasets from individual labs and the FANTOM consortium, one can now analyze the cis-regulatory regions associated with gene transcription at an unprecedented level of refinement. By coupling transcription factor binding site (TFBS) enrichment analysis with CAGE-derived genomic regions, CAGEd-oPOSSUM can identify TFs that act as key regulators of genes involved in specific mammalian cell and tissue types. The webtool allows for the analysis of CAGE-derived transcription start sites (TSSs) either provided by the user or selected from ∼1300 mammalian samples from the FANTOM5 project with pre-computed TFBS predicted with JASPAR TF binding profiles. The tool helps power insights into the regulation of genes through the study of the specific usage of TSSs within specific cell types and/or under specific conditions. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The CAGEd-oPOSUM web tool is implemented in Perl, MySQL and Apache and is available at http://cagedop.cmmt.ubc.ca/CAGEd_oPOSSUM CONTACTS: anthony.mathelier@ncmm.uio.no or wyeth@cmmt.ubc.ca SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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".