MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298217266 · doi:10.17615/rn2d-s510

A Compendium of Chromatin Contact Maps Reveals Spatially Active Regions in the Human Genome

2020· article· en· W4298217266 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Catherine Tan, Bing Ren, Xu Zheng, Yun Li, Inkyung Jung, Cathy L. Barr, Ming Hu, Yunjiang Qiu, Anthony D. Schmitt, Shin Lin, Yiing Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueUNC Libraries · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California, San DiegoNational Institutes of HealthHospital for Sick ChildrenKrembil FoundationLudwig Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsCompendiumChromatinHuman genomeGenomeComputational biologyBiologyEvolutionary biologyGeneticsGeographyDNAGeneArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The three-dimensional configuration of DNA is integral to all nuclear processes in eukaryotes, yet our knowledge of the chromosome architecture is still limited. Genome-wide chromosome conformation capture studies have uncovered features of chromatin organization in cultured cells, but genome architecture in human tissues has yet to be explored. Here, we report the most comprehensive survey to date of chromatin organization in human tissues. Through integrative analysis of chromatin contact maps in 21 primary human tissues and cell types, we find topologically associating domains highly conserved in different tissues. We also discover genomic regions that exhibit unusually high levels of local chromatin interactions. These frequently interacting regions (FIREs) are enriched for super-enhancers and are near tissue-specifically expressed genes. They display strong tissue-specificity in local chromatin interactions. Additionally, FIRE formation is partially dependent on CTCF and the Cohesin complex. We further show that FIREs can help annotate the function of non-coding sequence variants.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUNC LibrariesSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207