DeepReg: a deep learning hybrid model for predicting transcription factors in eukaryotic and prokaryotic genomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning models (DLMs) have gained importance in predicting, detecting, translating, and classifying a diversity of inputs. In bioinformatics, DLMs have been used to predict protein structures, transcription factor-binding sites, and promoters. In this work, we propose a hybrid model to identify transcription factors (TFs) among prokaryotic and eukaryotic protein sequences, named Deep Regulation (DeepReg) model. Two architectures were used in the DL model: a convolutional neural network (CNN), and a bidirectional long-short-term memory (BiLSTM). DeepReg reached a precision of 0.99, a recall of 0.97, and an F1-score of 0.98. The quality of our predictions, the bias-variance trade-off approach, and the characterization of new TF predictions were evaluated and compared against those produced by DeepTFactor, as well as against experimental data from three model organisms. Predictions based on our DLM tended to exhibit less variance and bias than those from DeepTFactor, thus increasing reliability and decreasing overfitting.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".