CDBProm: the Comprehensive Directory of Bacterial Promoters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The decreasing cost of whole genome sequencing has produced high volumes of genomic information that require annotation. The experimental identification of promoter sequences, pivotal for regulating gene expression, is a laborious and cost-prohibitive task. To expedite this, we introduce the Comprehensive Directory of Bacterial Promoters (CDBProm), a directory of in-silico predicted bacterial promoter sequences. We first identified that an Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm would distinguish promoters from random downstream regions with an accuracy of 87%. To capture distinctive promoter signals, we generated a second XGBoost classifier trained on the instances misclassified in our first classifier. The predictor of CDBProm is then fed with over 55 million upstream regions from more than 6000 bacterial genomes. Upon finding potential promoter sequences in upstream regions, each promoter is mapped to the genomic data of the organism, linking the predicted promoter with its coding DNA sequence, and identifying the function of the gene regulated by the promoter. The collection of bacterial promoters available in CDBProm enables the quantitative analysis of a plethora of bacterial promoters. Our collection with over 24 million promoters is publicly available at https://aw.iimas.unam.mx/cdbprom/
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.015 |
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".