RPmirDIP: Reciprocal Perspective improves miRNA targeting prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are short, non-coding RNAs that interact with messenger RNA (mRNA) to accomplish critical cellular activities such as the regulation of gene expression. Several machine learning methods have been developed to improve classification accuracy and reduce validation costs by predicting which miRNA will target which gene. Application of these predictors to large numbers of unique miRNA-gene pairs has resulted in datasets comprising tens of millions of scored interactions; the largest among these is mirDIP. We here demonstrate that miRNA target prediction can be significantly improved ([Formula: see text]) through the application of the Reciprocal Perspective (RP) method, a cascaded, semi-supervised machine learning method originally developed for protein-protein interaction prediction. The RP method, aptly named RPmirDIP, augments the original mirDIP prediction scores by leveraging local thresholds from the two complimentary views available to each miRNA-gene pair, rather than apply a traditional global decision threshold. Application of this novel RPmirDIP predictor promises to help identify new, unexpected miRNA-gene interactions. A dataset of RPmirDIP-scored interactions are made available to the scientific community at cu-bic.ca/RPmirDIP and https://doi.org/10.5683/SP2/LD8JKJ.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".