MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386499154 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-41143-7

A generalizable Cas9/sgRNA prediction model using machine transfer learning with small high-quality datasets

2023· article· en· W4386499154 on OpenAlexafffund
Dalton T. Ham, Tyler S. Browne, Pooja N. Banglorewala, Tyler L. Wilson, Richard K. Michael, Gregory B. Gloor, David R. Edgell

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacsGovernment of Canada
KeywordsCas9CRISPRComputer scienceNucleaseGenome editingGenome engineeringGuide RNAComputational biologyArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBiologyDNAGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CRISPR/Cas9 nuclease from Streptococcus pyogenes (SpCas9) can be used with single guide RNAs (sgRNAs) as a sequence-specific antimicrobial agent and as a genome-engineering tool. However, current bacterial sgRNA activity models struggle with accurate predictions and do not generalize well, possibly because the underlying datasets used to train the models do not accurately measure SpCas9/sgRNA activity and cannot distinguish on-target cleavage from toxicity. Here, we solve this problem by using a two-plasmid positive selection system to generate high-quality data that more accurately reports on SpCas9/sgRNA cleavage and that separates activity from toxicity. We develop a machine learning architecture (crisprHAL) that can be trained on existing datasets, that shows marked improvements in sgRNA activity prediction accuracy when transfer learning is used with small amounts of high-quality data, and that can generalize predictions to different bacteria. The crisprHAL model recapitulates known SpCas9/sgRNA-target DNA interactions and provides a pathway to a generalizable sgRNA bacterial activity prediction tool that will enable accurate antimicrobial and genome engineering applications.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207