ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2024
Recognition of cyanobacteria promoters via Siamese network-based contrastive learning under novel non-promoter generation.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- PBP_ICBA: a prediction of bacterial promoters in specific organisms using an improved convolutional block attention module.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026Article
- Review
- DNA sequence analysis landscape: a comprehensive review of DNA sequence analysis task types, databases, datasets, word embedding methods, and language models.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- iPro-CSAF: identification of promoters based on convolutional spiking neural networks and spiking attention mechanism.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
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
Abstract
It is a vital step to recognize cyanobacteria promoters on a genome-wide scale. Computational methods are promising to assist in difficult biological identification. When building recognition models, these methods rely on non-promoter generation to cope with the lack of real non-promoters. Nevertheless, the factitious significant difference between promoters and non-promoters causes over-optimistic prediction. Moreover, designed for E. coli or B. subtilis, existing methods cannot uncover novel, distinct motifs among cyanobacterial promoters. To address these issues, this work first proposes a novel non-promoter generation strategy called phantom sampling, which can eliminate the factitious difference between promoters and generated non-promoters. Furthermore, it elaborates a novel promoter prediction model based on the Siamese network (SiamProm), which can amplify the hidden difference between promoters and non-promoters through a joint characterization of global associations, upstream and downstream contexts, and neighboring associations w.r.t. k-mer tokens. The comparison with state-of-the-art methods demonstrates the superiority of our phantom sampling and SiamProm. Both comprehensive ablation studies and feature space illustrations also validate the effectiveness of the Siamese network and its components. More importantly, SiamProm, upon our phantom sampling, finds a novel cyanobacterial promoter motif ('GCGATCGC'), which is palindrome-patterned, content-conserved, but position-shifted.
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.