MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398202116 · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2024.05.031

BioPrediction-RPI: Democratizing the prediction of interaction between non-coding RNA and protein with end-to-end machine learning

2024· article· en· W4398202116 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bruno Rafael Florentino, Robson Parmezan Bonidia, Natan Henrique Sanches, Ulisses Nunes da Rocha, André C. P. L. F. de Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsInterpretabilityComputer scienceEnd-to-end principleMachine learningCategorical variableFeature engineeringPipeline (software)Artificial intelligenceCoding (social sciences)End userData miningDeep learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine Learning (ML) algorithms have been important tools for the extraction of useful knowledge from biological sequences, particularly in healthcare, agriculture, and the environment. However, the categorical and unstructured nature of these sequences requiring usually additional feature engineering steps, before an ML algorithm can be efficiently applied. The addition of these steps to the ML algorithm creates a processing pipeline, known as end-to-end ML. Despite the excellent results obtained by applying end-to-end ML to biotechnology problems, the performance obtained depends on the expertise of the user in the components of the pipeline. In this work, we propose an end-to-end ML-based framework called BioPrediction-RPI, which can identify implicit interactions between sequences, such as pairs of non-coding RNA and proteins, without the need for specialized expertise in end-to-end ML. This framework applies feature engineering to represent each sequence by structural and topological features. These features are divided into feature groups and used to train partial models, whose partial decisions are combined into a final decision, which, provides insights to the user by giving an interpretability report. In our experiments, the developed framework was competitive when compared with various expert-created models. We assessed BioPrediction-RPI with 12 datasets when it presented equal or better performance than all tools in 40% to 100% of cases, depending on the experiment. Finally, BioPrediction-RPI can fine-tune models based on new data and perform at the same level as ML experts, democratizing end-to-end ML and increasing its access to those working in biological sciences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational and Structural Biotechnology JournalSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207