ArticleBMC bioinformatics2024
iProL: identifying DNA promoters from sequence information based on Longformer pre-trained model.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- UnconditionalSynthetic and systems biotechnology · 2026Article
- Article
- Negative dataset selection impacts machine learning-based predictors for multiple bacterial species promoters.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- iPro-CSAF: identification of promoters based on convolutional spiking neural networks and spiking attention mechanism.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- An enhanced BERT model with improved local feature extraction and long-range dependency capture in promoter prediction for hearing loss.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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Promoters are essential elements of DNA sequence, usually located in the immediate region of the gene transcription start sites, and play a critical role in the regulation of gene transcription. Its importance in molecular biology and genetics has attracted the research interest of researchers, and it has become a consensus to seek a computational method to efficiently identify promoters. Still, existing methods suffer from imbalanced recognition capabilities for positive and negative samples, and their recognition effect can still be further improved. We conducted research on E. coli promoters and proposed a more advanced prediction model, iProL, based on the Longformer pre-trained model in the field of natural language processing. iProL does not rely on prior biological knowledge but simply uses promoter DNA sequences as plain text to identify promoters. It also combines one-dimensional convolutional neural networks and bidirectional long short-term memory to extract both local and global features. Experimental results show that iProL has a more balanced and superior performance than currently published methods. Additionally, we constructed a novel independent test set following the previous specification and compared iProL with three existing methods on this independent test set.
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.