Prediction of mRNA subcellular localization using deep recurrent neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Messenger RNA subcellular localization mechanisms play a crucial role in post-transcriptional gene regulation. This trafficking is mediated by trans-acting RNA-binding proteins interacting with cis-regulatory elements called zipcodes. While new sequencing-based technologies allow the high-throughput identification of RNAs localized to specific subcellular compartments, the precise mechanisms at play, and their dependency on specific sequence elements, remain poorly understood. RESULTS: We introduce RNATracker, a novel deep neural network built to predict, from their sequence alone, the distributions of mRNA transcripts over a predefined set of subcellular compartments. RNATracker integrates several state-of-the-art deep learning techniques (e.g. CNN, LSTM and attention layers) and can make use of both sequence and secondary structure information. We report on a variety of evaluations showing RNATracker's strong predictive power, which is significantly superior to a variety of baseline predictors. Despite its complexity, several aspects of the model can be isolated to yield valuable, testable mechanistic hypotheses, and to locate candidate zipcode sequences within transcripts. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Code and data can be accessed at https://www.github.com/HarveyYan/RNATracker. 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".