cDeepbind: A context sensitive deep learning model of RNA-protein binding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Motivation Determining RNA binding protein(RBP) binding specificity is crucial for understanding many cellular processes and genetic disorders. RBP binding is known to be affected by both the sequence and structure of RNAs. Deep learning can be used to learn generalizable representations of raw data and has improved state of the art in several fields such as image classification, speech recognition and even genomics. Previous work on RBP binding has either used shallow models that combine sequence and structure or deep models that use only the sequence. Here we combine both abilities by augmenting and refining the original Deepbind architecture to capture structural information and obtain significantly better performance. Results We propose two deep architectures, one a lightweight convolutional network for transcriptome wide inference and another a Long Short-Term Memory(LSTM) network that is suitable for small batches of data. We incorporate computationally predicted secondary structure features as input to our models and show its effectiveness in boosting prediction performance. Our models achieved significantly higher correlations on held out in-vitro test data compared to previous approaches, and generalise well to in-vivo CLIP-SEQ data achieving higher median AUCs than other approaches. We analysed the output from our model for VTS1 and CPO and provided intuition into its working. Our models confirmed known secondary structure preferences for some proteins as well as found new ones where secondary structure might play a role. We also demonstrated the strengths of our model compared to other approaches such as the ability to combine information from long distances along the input. Availability Software and models are available at https://github.com/shreshthgandhi/cDeepbind Contact ljlee@psi.toronto.edu , frey@psi.toronto.edu
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".