LegNet: a best-in-class deep learning model for short DNA regulatory regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: The increasing volume of data from high-throughput experiments including parallel reporter assays facilitates the development of complex deep-learning approaches for modeling DNA regulatory grammar. RESULTS: Here, we introduce LegNet, an EfficientNetV2-inspired convolutional network for modeling short gene regulatory regions. By approaching the sequence-to-expression regression problem as a soft classification task, LegNet secured first place for the autosome.org team in the DREAM 2022 challenge of predicting gene expression from gigantic parallel reporter assays. Using published data, here, we demonstrate that LegNet outperforms existing models and accurately predicts gene expression per se as well as the effects of single-nucleotide variants. Furthermore, we show how LegNet can be used in a diffusion network manner for the rational design of promoter sequences yielding the desired expression level. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/autosome-ru/LegNet. The GitHub repository includes Jupyter Notebook tutorials and Python scripts under the MIT license to reproduce the results presented in the study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".