ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016
Stepwise approach for combining many sources of evidence for site-recognition in genomic sequences.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nonlinear physics opens a new paradigm for accurate transcription start site prediction.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecognizing the different functional parts of genes, such as promoters, translation initiation sites, donors, acceptors and stop codons, is a fundamental task of many current studies in Bioinformatics. Currently, the most successful methods use powerful classifiers, such as support vector machines with various string kernels. However, with the rapid evolution of our ability to collect genomic information, it has been shown that combining many sources of evidence is fundamental to the success of any recognition task. With the advent of next-generation sequencing, the number of available genomes is increasing very rapidly. Thus, methods for making use of such large amounts of information are needed.
resultsIn this paper, we present a methodology for combining tens or even hundreds of different classifiers for an improved performance. Our approach can include almost a limitless number of sources of evidence. We can use the evidence for the prediction of sites in a certain species, such as human, or other species as needed. This approach can be used for any of the functional recognition tasks cited above. However, to provide the necessary focus, we have tested our approach in two functional recognition tasks: translation initiation site and stop codon recognition. We have used the entire human genome as a target and another 20 species as sources of evidence and tested our method on five different human chromosomes. The proposed method achieves better accuracy than the best state-of-the-art method both in terms of the geometric mean of the specificity and sensitivity and the area under the receiver operating characteristic and precision recall curves. Furthermore, our approach shows a more principled way for selecting the best genomes to be combined for a given recognition task.
conclusionsOur approach has proven to be a powerful tool for improving the performance of functional site recognition, and it is a useful method for combining many sources of evidence for any recognition task in Bioinformatics. The results also show that the common approach of heuristically choosing the species to be used as source of evidence can be improved because the best combinations of genomes for recognition were those not usually selected. Although the experiments were performed for translation initiation site and stop codon recognition, any other recognition task may benefit from our methodology.
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.