Two-State Stochastic Model of In Vivo Observations of Transcriptional Bursts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In vivo measurements of gene expression in single cells show behavior that has been interpreted as stochastic bursts of transcription. In one case, these data have been interpreted as random ON–OFF transitions of the gene, but there is no experimental measurements or theoretical treatment of the number of transcripts produced at each burst event. In another case, such data have been interpreted to indicate multiple underlying transcriptional states. Here, we place both of these experiments in a common theoretical framework. In it, we couple two stochastic processes, one for synthesis of transcripts and one for their removal. Analysis of the resulting model is greatly aided by the existence of exact solutions of the master equation. We find the bursting limit of the exact solutions for our two-state gene expression model and show the occurrence of bursts of multiple sizes and durations by exact stochastic simulations. We also demonstrate that data from Drosophila melanogaster interpreted in terms of multiple underlying transcription states is fully compatible with underlying two-state ON or OFF transcriptional behavior. We discuss what experimental data is required to unambiguously determine the number of underlying promoter states.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".