Discovery and validation of information theory-based transcription factor and cofactor binding site motifs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data from ChIP-seq experiments can derive the genome-wide binding specificities of transcription factors (TFs) and other regulatory proteins. We analyzed 765 ENCODE ChIP-seq peak datasets of 207 human TFs with a novel motif discovery pipeline based on recursive, thresholded entropy minimization. This approach, while obviating the need to compensate for skewed nucleotide composition, distinguishes true binding motifs from noise, quantifies the strengths of individual binding sites based on computed affinity and detects adjacent cofactor binding sites that coordinate with the targets of primary, immunoprecipitated TFs. We obtained contiguous and bipartite information theory-based position weight matrices (iPWMs) for 93 sequence-specific TFs, discovered 23 cofactor motifs for 127 TFs and revealed six high-confidence novel motifs. The reliability and accuracy of these iPWMs were determined via four independent validation methods, including the detection of experimentally proven binding sites, explanation of effects of characterized SNPs, comparison with previously published motifs and statistical analyses. We also predict previously unreported TF coregulatory interactions (e.g. TF complexes). These iPWMs constitute a powerful tool for predicting the effects of sequence variants in known binding sites, performing mutation analysis on regulatory SNPs and predicting previously unrecognized binding sites and target genes.
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 | 0.017 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".