A Suite of Foundation Models Captures the Contextual Interplay Between Codons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the canonical genetic code, many amino acids are assigned more than one codon. Work by us and others has shown that the choice of these synonymous codon is not random, and carries regulatory and functional consequences. Existing protein foundation models ignore this context-dependent role of coding sequence in shaping the protein landscape of the cell. To address this gap, we introduce cdsFM, a suite of codon-resolution large language models, including both EnCodon and DeCodon models, with up to 1B parameters. Pre-trained on 60 million protein-coding sequences from more than 5,000 species, our models effectively learn the relationship between codons and amino acids, recapitualing the overall structure of the genetic code. In addition to outperforming state-of-the-art genomic foundation models in a variety of zero-shot and few-shot learning tasks, the larger pre-trained models were superior in predicting the choice of synonymous codons. To systematically assess the impact of synonymous codon choices on protein expression and our models' ability to capture these effects, we generated a large dataset measuring overall and surface expression levels of three proteins as a function of changes in their synonymous codons. We showed that our EnCodon models could be readily fine-tuned to predict the contextual consequences of synonymous codon choices. Armed with this knowledge, we applied EnCodon to existing clinical datasets of synonymous variants, and we identified a large number of synonymous codons that are likely pathogenic, several of which we experimentally confirmed in a cell-based model. Together, our findings establish the cdsFM suite as a powerful tool for decoding the complex functional grammar underlying the choice of synonymous codons.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".