Evaluating the impact of single nucleotide variants on transcription factor binding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diseases and phenotypes caused by disrupted transcription factor (TF) binding are being identified, but progress is hampered by our limited capacity to predict such functional alterations. Improving predictions may be dependent on expanding the set of bona fide TF binding alterations. Allele-specific binding (ASB) events, where TFs preferentially bind to one of the two alleles at heterozygous sites, reveal the impact of sequence variations in altered TF binding. Here, we present the largest ASB compilation to our knowledge, 10 765 ASB events retrieved from 45 ENCODE ChIP-Seq data sets. Our analysis showed that ASB events were frequently associated with motif alterations of the ChIP'ed TF and potential partner TFs, allelic difference of DNase I hypersensitivity and allelic difference of histone modifications. For TF dimers bound symmetrically to DNA, ASB data revealed that central positions of the TF binding motifs were disproportionately important for binding. Lastly, the impact of variation on TF binding was predicted by a classification model incorporating all the investigated features of ASB events. Classification models using only DNase I hypersensitivity and sequence data exhibited predictive accuracy approaching the models with substantially more features. Taken together, the combination of ASB data and the classification model represents an important step toward elucidating regulatory variants across the human genome.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".