MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310474959 · doi:10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102760

Off the deep end: What can deep learning do for the gene expression field?

2022· article· en· W4310474959 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ana‐Maria Raicu, Justin C. Fay, Nicolas Rohner, Julia Zeitlinger, David N. Arnosti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentAmerican Society for Biochemistry and Molecular BiologyStowers Institute for Medical Research
KeywordsDeep learningGene expressionField (mathematics)GeneArtificial intelligenceBiologyComputational biologyCell biologyGeneticsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After a COVID-related hiatus, the fifth biennial symposium on Evolution and Core Processes in Gene Regulation met at the Stowers Institute in Kansas City, Missouri July 21 to 24, 2022. This symposium, sponsored by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB), featured experts in gene regulation and evolutionary biology. Topic areas covered enhancer evolution, the cis-regulatory code, and regulatory variation, with an overall focus on bringing the power of deep learning (DL) to decipher DNA sequence information. DL is a machine learning method that uses neural networks to learn complex rules that make predictions about diverse types of data. When DL models are trained to predict genomic data from DNA sequence information, their high prediction accuracy allows the identification of impactful genetic variants within and across species. In addition, the learned sequence rules can be extracted from the model and provide important clues about the mechanistic underpinnings of the cis-regulatory code.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.012
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207