ArticleBMC bioinformatics2007
Improved benchmarks for computational motif discovery.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed.
- Guidelines on the performance evaluation of motif recognition methods in bioinformatics.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- DiNAMO: highly sensitive DNA motif discovery in high-throughput sequencing data.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- Evaluating tools for transcription factor binding site prediction.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- DynaMIT: the dynamic motif integration toolkit.Nucleic acids research · 2016Article
- MOST+: A de novo motif finding approach combining genomic sequence and heterogeneous genome-wide signatures.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Transcription factor motif quality assessment requires systematic comparative analysis.F1000Research · 2015Article
- DNA motif elucidation using belief propagation.Nucleic acids research · 2013Article
- Promzea: a pipeline for discovery of co-regulatory motifs in maize and other plant species and its application to the anthocyanin and phlobaphene biosynthetic pathways and the Maize Development Atlas.BMC plant biology · 2013Article
- Motif discovery and transcription factor binding sites before and after the next-generation sequencing era.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2013Article
- MotifLab: a tools and data integration workbench for motif discovery and regulatory sequence analysis.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- P-value-based regulatory motif discovery using positional weight matrices.Genome research · 2013Article
- Computational discovery of regulatory elements in a continuous expression space.Genome biology · 2012Article
- A novel ab initio identification system of transcriptional regulation motifs in genome DNA sequences based on direct comparison scheme of signal/noise distributions.Nucleic acids research · 2012Article
- Towards a theoretical understanding of false positives in DNA motif finding.BMC bioinformatics · 2012Article
- The limits of de novo DNA motif discovery.PloS one · 2012Article
- Improved accuracy of supervised CRM discovery with interpolated Markov models and cross-species comparison.Nucleic acids research · 2011Article
- MotifClick: prediction of cis-regulatory binding sites via merging cliques.BMC bioinformatics · 2011Article
- A ChIP-Seq benchmark shows that sequence conservation mainly improves detection of strong transcription factor binding sites.PloS one · 2011Article
- De-novo discovery of differentially abundant transcription factor binding sites including their positional preference.PLoS computational biology · 2011Article
- FITBAR: a web tool for the robust prediction of prokaryotic regulons.BMC bioinformatics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn important step in annotation of sequenced genomes is the identification of transcription factor binding sites. More than a hundred different computational methods have been proposed, and it is difficult to make an informed choice. Therefore, robust assessment of motif discovery methods becomes important, both for validation of existing tools and for identification of promising directions for future research.
resultsWe use a machine learning perspective to analyze collections of transcription factors with known binding sites. Algorithms are presented for finding position weight matrices (PWMs), IUPAC-type motifs and mismatch motifs with optimal discrimination of binding sites from remaining sequence. We show that for many data sets in a recently proposed benchmark suite for motif discovery, none of the common motif models can accurately discriminate the binding sites from remaining sequence. This may obscure the distinction between the potential performance of the motif discovery tool itself versus the intrinsic complexity of the problem we are trying to solve. Synthetic data sets may avoid this problem, but we show on some previously proposed benchmarks that there may be a strong bias towards a presupposed motif model. We also propose a new approach to benchmark data set construction. This approach is based on collections of binding site fragments that are ranked according to the optimal level of discrimination achieved with our algorithms. This allows us to select subsets with specific properties. We present one benchmark suite with data sets that allow good discrimination between positive and negative instances with the common motif models. These data sets are suitable for evaluating algorithms for motif discovery that rely on these models. We present another benchmark suite where PWM, IUPAC and mismatch motif models are not able to discriminate reliably between positive and negative instances. This suite could be used for evaluating more powerful motif models.
conclusionOur improved benchmark suites have been designed to differentiate between the performance of motif discovery algorithms and the power of motif models. We provide a web server where users can download our benchmark suites, submit predictions and visualize scores on the benchmarks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.