Representing transcription factor dimers by using forked-position weight matrices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Position Weight Matrices (PWMs) and sequence logos are one of the most popular tools among researchers for modelling and visualizing Transcription Factor (TF) Binding Sites (TFBS). The PWM based models predict a single DNA sequence as a reference TFBS for a specific TF, based on experimentally determined sequence information. One of the standard assays for characterizing the TFBS of one TF on a genomic-wide scale is called ChIP-Seq. The Chromatin Immunoprecipitation (ChIP) method uses TF-specific antibodies to capture protein:DNA complexes, followed by high-throughput sequencing of the bound DNA sequences (Seq). These experiments are applied in a controlled manner to target only one TF at each run, thus describing TFBSs of a single TF of interest. This approach is proven to be imprecise because many TFs (e.g. Leucine Zippers) tend to bind to the DNA as homodimers or heterodimers. Hence, the ChIP-seq assay will obtain the entire set of dimer complexes of a target TF (homodimers and heterodimers); and merge the captured information into a single PWM which subsequently will lead to an imprecise description of the TFBS. The TFBS constructed by the mixture of homodimers and heterodimers will result in a model with two halves: a conserved part (binding sites of the TF of interest) and a degenerated part (representing a mixture of the binding sites of TF’s partners). Current PWMs (or Sequence Logos) seem inadequate to represent TF dimer binding sites since they fail to represent the TF’s binding dynamic and disregard the alteration in sequence preference caused by different dimer partners of the given TF. To tackle this problem, we introduce an R library named Forked Position Weight Matrix (FPWM), which provides the user with variant functionalities to generate a more precise PWM that adapts to TF dimers by forking it into the co-factors of the main TF. The FPWM enhances TFBS prediction’s power and allows the biologists to have a more precise interpretation of cell context by providing a more expressive model of TFBSs. The FPWM is less susceptible to false-positives and is a more precise way to represent dimer TFBSs, which introduces a new standard in dimer and TFBSs analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".