Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39775239›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2024

Systematic benchmarking of deep-learning methods for tertiary RNA structure prediction.

Akash Bahai, Chee Keong Kwoh, Yuguang Mu, Yinghui Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
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.

Akash BahaiSchool of Biological Sciences (SBS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
Chee Keong KwohSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
Yuguang MuSchool of Biological Sciences (SBS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.
Yinghui LiSchool of Biological Sciences (SBS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9023-9466

Funding

NCIPC CDC HHS U17 CE002021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 3D structure of RNA critically influences its functionality, and understanding this structure is vital for deciphering RNA biology. Experimental methods for determining RNA structures are labour-intensive, expensive, and time-consuming. Computational approaches have emerged as valuable tools, leveraging physics-based-principles and machine learning to predict RNA structures rapidly. Despite advancements, the accuracy of computational methods remains modest, especially when compared to protein structure prediction. Deep learning methods, while successful in protein structure prediction, have shown some promise for RNA structure prediction as well, but face unique challenges. This study systematically benchmarks state-of-the-art deep learning methods for RNA structure prediction across diverse datasets. Our aim is to identify factors influencing performance variation, such as RNA family diversity, sequence length, RNA type, multiple sequence alignment (MSA) quality, and deep learning model architecture. We show that generally ML-based methods perform much better than non-ML methods on most RNA targets, although the performance difference isn't substantial when working with unseen novel or synthetic RNAs. The quality of the MSA and secondary structure prediction both play an important role and most methods aren't able to predict non-Watson-Crick pairs in the RNAs. Overall among the automated 3D RNA structure prediction methods, DeepFoldRNA has the best prediction results followed by DRFold as the second best method. Finally, we also suggest possible mitigations to improve the quality of the prediction for future method development.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingComputational BiologyDeep LearningNucleic Acid ConformationRNASequence AlignmentSequence Analysis, RNARNA

Identifiers

PMID39775239
PMCPMC11723642

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.