Codebook: sequence specificity and genomic binding of poorly-characterized human transcription factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY Gene expression is regulated by transcription factors (TFs), which recognize specific DNA sequence motifs. Several hundred putative human TFs, identified mainly by an apparent DNA-binding domain, lack known binding motifs 1 , and even for well-characterized TFs, it remains controversial to what degree motifs accurately reflect binding sites in living cells 2,3 . Here, we describe a systematic effort (“Codebook”) to determine the sequence specificity of 332 putative and poorly characterized human TFs. Over 4,000 independent experiments, encompassing multiple in vitro and in vivo assays, produced motifs for just over half (177, or 53%), of which most are unique to a single protein, thereby extending the vocabulary of sequence recognition encoded by human TFs by ∼100 distinct motifs. Moreover, binding motifs identified in vitro are strongly enriched within cellular binding sites. Collectively, the data reveal tens of thousands of previously unknown, conserved, and direct TF binding sites across the human genome. These sites are concentrated in promoter regions, and are predictive of gene expression, illustrating that this new data atlas provides an important step forward in decoding the human genome.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".