MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133056482

RNA secondary structure prediction using hybrid methods

2024· dissertation· W7133056482 on OpenAlexaff
JIEXIN GAO

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptabilityLeverage (statistics)Reinforcement learningArtificial neural networkGeneralizationDeep learningInferenceENCODE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a novel two-stage framework for RNA secondary structure prediction, introducing deep learning models that address local substructure prediction and global structure assembly. Drawing insights from RNA folding kinetics, the stage-1 (S1) model proposes local substructures as pixel-level square bounding boxes. The subsequent stage-2 (S2) models, including the scoring network (S2SC) and the encoder-decoder transformer (S2ED), leverage recurrent neural networks (RNNs) with Dynamic Programming (DP) and an encoder-decoder network with a subset prediction formulation, respectively, to achieve efficient global structure assembly. The proposed framework exhibits high accuracy on the human-transcriptome (HT) dataset. However, challenges in performance on the bpRNA dataset are observed, potentially stemming from dataset bias and limitations of the S1 model. Nevertheless, the models exhibit strong generalization capabilities compared to other deep learning models, attributed to the robust inductive bias introduced by the two-stage formulation. Anticipating advancements in computational resources and model architecture, ongoing improvements in performance are expected. The adaptability of the framework is a key highlight, as demonstrated by its capacity to be tailored to new datasets. For example, adjusting the reinforcement learning reward facilitates training the S2ED model on datasets with different structure distributions, showcasing the versatility of the proposed approach. In conclusion, this work offers a unique and effective perspective in RNA secondary structure prediction. Despite current limitations, the framework's adaptability and generalization underscore its potential for continuous evolution, particularly with the anticipated advancements in computational capabilities and the availability of diverse datasets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 venueTSpaceSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207