MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126423661 · doi:10.21428/594757db.26effc01

TransformerChrome: Transformer-based Model for Prediction ofGene Expression from Histone Modifications

2024· article· en· W7126423661 on OpenAlexaff
M. Tahir, Shehroz S. Khan, James Davie, Soichiro Yamanaka, Ahmed Ashraf

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoneEpigeneticsGene expressionChromatinRegulation of gene expressionGeneEpigenomeMechanism (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epigenetic mechanisms play a crucial role in regulating the expression of genes affecting the development, growth, and functioning of organisms, ensuring the activation or repression of specific genes at the appropriate times and in the correct cells. This functionality enables organisms to adapt to internal and external stimuli, uphold homeostasis, and execute diverse biological processes. One such mechanism modulating the expression of genes involves modification of histone proteins. Consequently, there is a need for identifying and comprehensively understanding various histone modifications and their effect on gene expression. The laboratory-based identification process entails the examination of histone modifications (HMs) to analyze the chemical alterations of histone proteins associated with DNA. On the other hand, technological advancements empower AI to address these challenges by discerning protein chemical alterations at HMs associated with DNA, facilitating accelerated comprehension of gene expression with maintained precision, result accuracy, and substantial cost reduction. In this paper, we introduce TransformerChrome, a computational model-based on the transformer neural network architecture, designed to take HMs from gene sites as input and predict gene expression as output. The developed TransformerChrome model has been trained and tested across 56 distinct cell types, using five core HMs. The presented model has been compared against state-of-the-art HM based gene expression predictive models across benchmark datasets in humans. The model is evaluated in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The results show superior performance, especially on cell types for which other models show significantly lower performance.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207