Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38608190›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024

Effect of tokenization on transformers for biological sequences.

Edo Dotan, Gal Jaschek, Tal Pupko, Yonatan Belinkov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. A survey on large language models in biology and chemistry.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2026
    Review
  4. AI for scientific discovery is a social problem.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Fluctuation structure predicts genome-wide perturbation outcomes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Deciphering genomic codes using advanced natural language processing techniques: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Edo DotanThe Henry and Marilyn Taub Faculty of Computer Science, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 3200003, Israel.
Gal JaschekDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, United States.
Tal PupkoThe Shmunis School of Biomedicine and Cancer Research, George S. Wise Faculty of Life Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-9463-2575
Yonatan BelinkovThe Henry and Marilyn Taub Faculty of Computer Science, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 3200003, Israel.

Funding

Azrieli Foundation Early Career Faculty FellowshipIsrael Science Foundation 2818/21Tel Aviv University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationDeep-learning models are transforming biological research, including many bioinformatics and comparative genomics algorithms, such as sequence alignments, phylogenetic tree inference, and automatic classification of protein functions. Among these deep-learning algorithms, models for processing natural languages, developed in the natural language processing (NLP) community, were recently applied to biological sequences. However, biological sequences are different from natural languages, such as English, and French, in which segmentation of the text to separate words is relatively straightforward. Moreover, biological sequences are characterized by extremely long sentences, which hamper their processing by current machine-learning models, notably the transformer architecture. In NLP, one of the first processing steps is to transform the raw text to a list of tokens. Deep-learning applications to biological sequence data mostly segment proteins and DNA to single characters. In this work, we study the effect of alternative tokenization algorithms on eight different tasks in biology, from predicting the function of proteins and their stability, through nucleotide sequence alignment, to classifying proteins to specific families.

resultsWe demonstrate that applying alternative tokenization algorithms can increase accuracy and at the same time, substantially reduce the input length compared to the trivial tokenizer in which each character is a token. Furthermore, applying these tokenization algorithms allows interpreting trained models, taking into account dependencies among positions. Finally, we trained these tokenizers on a large dataset of protein sequences containing more than 400 billion amino acids, which resulted in over a 3-fold decrease in the number of tokens. We then tested these tokenizers trained on large-scale data on the above specific tasks and showed that for some tasks it is highly beneficial to train database-specific tokenizers. Our study suggests that tokenizers are likely to be a critical component in future deep-network analysis of biological sequence data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Code, data, and trained tokenizers are available on https://github.com/technion-cs-nlp/BiologicalTokenizers.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsComputational BiologyDeep LearningNatural Language ProcessingProteinsSequence AlignmentSequence Analysis, ProteinProteins

Identifiers

PMID38608190
PMCPMC11055402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.