MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318937271 · doi:10.1093/ve/vead009

HexSE: Simulating evolution in overlapping reading frames

2023· article· en· W4318937271 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Muñoz‐Baena, Kaitlyn E Wade, Art F. Y. Poon

Bibliographic record

VenueVirus Evolution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOpen reading frameScripting languageSubstitution (logic)Computer scienceGenetic codeGenomeReading (process)Synonymous substitutionPython (programming language)SkewBiologyComputational biologyGeneticsGeneCodon usage biasProgramming languagePeptide sequence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gene overlap occurs when two or more genes are encoded by the same nucleotides. This phenomenon is found in all taxonomic domains, but is particularly common in viruses, where it may provide a mechanism to increase the information content of compact genomes. The presence of overlapping reading frames (OvRFs) can skew estimates of selection based on the rates of non-synonymous and synonymous substitutions, since a substitution that is synonymous in one reading frame may be non-synonymous in another and vice versa. To understand the impact of OvRFs on molecular evolution, we implemented a versatile simulation model of nucleotide sequence evolution along a phylogeny with any distribution of open reading frames in linear or circular genomes. We use a custom data structure to track the substitution rates at every nucleotide site, which is determined by the stationary nucleotide frequencies, transition bias and the distribution of selection biases (dN/dS) in the respective reading frames. Our simulation model is implemented in the Python scripting language. All source code is released under the GNU General Public License version 3 and are available at https://github.com/PoonLab/HexSE.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirus EvolutionSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207