ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2023
Splam: a deep-learning-based splice site predictor that improves spliced alignments.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The process of splicing messenger RNA to remove introns plays a central role in creating genes and gene variants. Here we describe Splam, a novel method for predicting splice junctions in DNA based on deep residual convolutional neural networks. Unlike some previous models, Splam looks at a relatively limited window of 400 base pairs flanking each splice site, motivated by the observation that the biological process of splicing relies primarily on signals within this window. Additionally, Splam introduces the idea of training the network on donor and acceptor pairs together, based on the principle that the splicing machinery recognizes both ends of each intron at once. We compare Splam's accuracy to recent state-of-the-art splice site prediction methods, particularly SpliceAI, another method that uses deep neural networks. Our results show that Splam is consistently more accurate than SpliceAI, with an overall accuracy of 96% at predicting human splice junctions. Splam generalizes even to non-human species, including distant ones like the flowering plant
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.