Biologically relevant transfer learning improves transcription factor binding prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deep learning has proven to be a powerful technique for transcription factor (TF) binding prediction but requires large training datasets. Transfer learning can reduce the amount of data required for deep learning, while improving overall model performance, compared to training a separate model for each new task. RESULTS: We assess a transfer learning strategy for TF binding prediction consisting of a pre-training step, wherein we train a multi-task model with multiple TFs, and a fine-tuning step, wherein we initialize single-task models for individual TFs with the weights learned by the multi-task model, after which the single-task models are trained at a lower learning rate. We corroborate that transfer learning improves model performance, especially if in the pre-training step the multi-task model is trained with biologically relevant TFs. We show the effectiveness of transfer learning for TFs with ~ 500 ChIP-seq peak regions. Using model interpretation techniques, we demonstrate that the features learned in the pre-training step are refined in the fine-tuning step to resemble the binding motif of the target TF (i.e., the recipient of transfer learning in the fine-tuning step). Moreover, pre-training with biologically relevant TFs allows single-task models in the fine-tuning step to learn useful features other than the motif of the target TF. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that transfer learning is a powerful technique for TF binding prediction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".