MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407253515 · doi:10.7554/elife.105565.1.sa3

eLife Assessment: Interpretable Protein-DNA Interactions Captured by Structure-Sequence Optimization

2025· peer-review· en· W4407253515 on OpenAlexaff
Anna R. Panchenko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSequence (biology)Computational biologyDNAComputer scienceDNA sequencingArtificial intelligenceBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sequence-specific DNA recognition underlies essential processes in gene regulation, yet methods for simultaneous prediction of genomic DNA recognition sites and their binding affinity remain lacking. Here, we present the Interpretable protein-DNA Energy Associative (IDEA) model, a residue-level, interpretable biophysical model capable of predicting binding sites and affinities of DNA-binding proteins. By fusing structures and sequences of known protein-DNA complexes into an optimized energy model, IDEA enables direct interpretation of physicochemical interactions among individual amino acids and nucleotides. We demonstrate that this energy model can accurately predict DNA recognition sites and their binding strengths across various protein families. Additionally, the IDEA model is integrated into a coarse-grained simulation framework that quantitatively captures the absolute protein-DNA binding free energies. Overall, IDEA provides an integrated computational platform alleviating experimental costs and biases in assessing DNA recognition and can be utilized for mechanistic studies of various DNA-recognition processes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207