RNANetMotif: Identifying sequence-structure RNA network motifs in RNA-protein binding sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNA molecules can adopt stable secondary and tertiary structures, which are essential in mediating physical interactions with other partners such as RNA binding proteins (RBPs) and in carrying out their cellular functions. In vivo and in vitro experiments such as RNAcompete and eCLIP have revealed in vitro binding preferences of RBPs to RNA oligomers and in vivo binding sites in cells. Analysis of these binding data showed that the structure properties of the RNAs in these binding sites are important determinants of the binding events; however, it has been a challenge to incorporate the structure information into an interpretable model. Here we describe a new approach, RNANetMotif, which takes predicted secondary structure of thousands of RNA sequences bound by an RBP as input and uses a graph theory approach to recognize enriched subgraphs. These enriched subgraphs are in essence shared sequence-structure elements that are important in RBP-RNA binding. To validate our approach, we performed RNA structure modeling via coarse-grained molecular dynamics folding simulations for selected 4 RBPs, and RNA-protein docking for LIN28B. The simulation results, e.g., solvent accessibility and energetics, further support the biological relevance of the discovered network subgraphs.
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".