MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300581088

Quantitative sequence and open reading frame analysis based on codon bias

2006· article· en· W4300581088 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Rainey, Joe Repka

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen reading frameReading (process)Sequence (biology)Computer scienceFrame (networking)Codon usage biasNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceGeneticsLinguisticsBiologyPeptide sequencePhilosophyTelecommunicationsGene
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frequencies with which the sixty-four codons occur in human coding DNA are known. If we assume that the codons occur randomly, subject only to these probabilities, then it is possible to predict trinucleotide frequencies in each of the five other reading frames. A model is developed for evaluating the extent to which a given sequence has trinucleotide frequencies compatible with coding DNA. This model is tested using known samples of coding DNA taken at random from GenBank, and good agreement is found. Practical and theoretical applications are discussed, including determination of coding open reading frames, evaluation of sequence data for frameshift mutations and examination of hypothetical genes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207