MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Finding the direct optimal RNA barrier energy and improving pathways with an arbitrary energy model

2020· article· en· W3043435966 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hiroki Takizawa, Junichi Iwakiri, Goro Terai, Kiyoshi Asai

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceInstitute of GeneticsArtificial Intelligence Research CenterNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology
KeywordsHeuristicsComputer scienceSource codeHamming distanceCode (set theory)Folding (DSP implementation)Energy (signal processing)RNATheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: RNA folding kinetics plays an important role in the biological functions of RNA molecules. An important goal in the investigation of the kinetic behavior of RNAs is to find the folding pathway with the lowest energy barrier. For this purpose, most of the existing methods use heuristics because the number of possible pathways is huge even if only the shortest (direct) folding pathways are considered. RESULTS: In this study, we propose a new method using a best-first search strategy to efficiently compute the exact solution of the minimum barrier energy of direct pathways. Using our method, we can find the exact direct pathways within a Hamming distance of 20, whereas the previous methods even miss the exact short pathways. Moreover, our method can be used to improve the pathways found by existing methods for exploring indirect pathways. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The source code and datasets created and used in this research are available at https://github.com/eukaryo/czno. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207