Prediction of exosomal piRNAs based on deep learning for sequence embedding with attention mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PIWI-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) are a type of small non-coding RNAs which bind with the PIWI proteins to exert biological effects in various regulatory mechanisms. A growing amount of evidence reveals that exosomal piRNAs are potential biomarkers for diagnosis and treatment of complex diseases. Effective methods for the prediction of exosomal piRNAs are the foundation of piRNA functional research. In this study, we propose an end-to-end deep network for identifying exosomal piRNAs based on features learned from natural language processing (NLP) models for sequence embedding with attention mechanism. First, a benchmark dataset is constructed by processing piRNA subcellular localization annotated data and sequence data. Moreover, bagging positive unlabeled learning is applied to get the reliable negative set. Finally, we treat a piRNA sequence as a sentence and its k-mer subsequence as a token. Sequence embedding models with self-attention mechanism is designed to extract features from exosome piRNA sequences, which are used for the prediction task. Compared with three competing methods, our model achieves the best performance and reveals the key factors of exosomal piRNA sequences by the attention mechanism. Our model characterizes exosomal piRNAs and could be beneficial for researchers to investigate exosomal piRNAs’ functions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".