MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949477413 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-38107-z

miPIE: NGS-based Prediction of miRNA Using Integrated Evidence

2019· article· en· W2949477413 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert James Peace, Mohsen Sheikh Hassani, James R. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputational biologymicroRNABioinformaticsBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methods for the de novo identification of microRNA (miRNA) have been developed using a range of sequence-based features. With the increasing availability of next generation sequencing (NGS) transcriptome data, there is a need for miRNA identification that integrates both NGS transcript expression-based patterns as well as advanced genomic sequence-based methods. While miRDeep2 does examine the predicted secondary structure of putative miRNA sequences, it does not leverage many of the sequence-based features used in state-of-the-art de novo methods. Meanwhile, other NGS-based methods, such as miRanalyzer, place an emphasis on sequence-based features without leveraging advanced expression-based features reflecting miRNA biosynthesis. This represents an opportunity to combine the strengths of NGS-based analysis with recent advances in de novo sequence-based miRNA prediction. We here develop a method, microRNA Prediction using Integrated Evidence (miPIE), which integrates both expression-based and sequence-based features to achieve significantly improved miRNA prediction performance. Feature selection identifies the 20 most discriminative features, 3 of which reflect strictly expression-based information. Evaluation using precision-recall curves, for six NGS data sets representing six diverse species, demonstrates substantial improvements in prediction performance compared to three methods: miRDeep2, miRanalyzer, and mirnovo. The individual contributions of expression-based and sequence-based features are also examined and we demonstrate that their combination is more effective than either alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207