MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989873935

On the characterization of protein-DNA interactions using statistical potentials and protein-protein interactions

2015· article· en· W6989873935 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsTranscription factorTranscription (linguistics)DNA binding siteTAF2GeneDNASp3 transcription factorGeneral transcription factorBinding siteBacterial transcription
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein-DNA interactions are indispensable players in the daily activities of cells. DNA-binding proteins regulate gene expression and are responsible of DNA replication, packaging, repair and recombination. Among them, transcription factors activate/repress gene transcription by binding to specific genomic sites. Hence, the characterization of transcription factor binding sites turns out to be crucial in order to understand gene regulation. In this context, the development of computational tools is foremost. Here, I show the prediction of redundant transcription factors in yeast using a combination of homology-based tools and protein-protein interactions. The approach was automated and incorporated into ModLink+, an online and user-friendly tool to infer the fold of remote homologs. Moreover, I describe split-statistical potentials for protein-DNA interactions. Finally, I present SHAITAN, a statistical/homology-based approach that can be used to both predict transcription factor binding sites and infer the more likely transcription factors to bind a DNA sequence of interest.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya)Same topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207