ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Uncertainty-aware benchmarking reveals ambiguous transcripts in mRNA-lncRNA classification.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have gained significant attention in recent years, yet distinguishing them from protein-coding transcripts remains challenging. Indeed, many lncRNAs share mRNA-like processing and existing sequence-derived signals do not fully capture the coding/non-coding boundary. Recent GENCODE annotation efforts revealed tens of thousands of novel lncRNA sequences as well as the reclassification of some lncRNAs into the protein-coding class, highlighting the need to better characterize transcript features associated with classification uncertainty and errors. Results: We performed uncertainty-aware benchmarking by retraining and evaluating eight transcript classifiers under a controlled protocol on a label-stable GENCODE v46-v47 subset. Beyond conventional model evaluation metrics, we quantified inter-tool agreement and entropy-based uncertainty to stratify transcripts into consensus, discordant, and consensus-error groups. To expand standard sequence and ORF-derived signals, we incorporated repeat-derived features from mature transcripts and non-B DNA motif features across gene bodies. Although aggregate performance was high, ~45% of transcripts showed inter-tool discordance, particularly among lncRNAs. Feature analyses linked low-uncertainty predictions to strong coding-like signals, whereas high-uncertainty profiles exhibited mixed signatures. Alongside classical predictors in global importance analyses, repeat-derived features appear as main contributors. Conclusions: By combining controlled benchmarking with transcript-level agreement and uncertainty stratification, together with extended feature profiling, we identified patterns associated with classifier disagreement and misclassification. This novel framework provides practical guidance for interpreting predictions, motivating the development of more robust coding/non-coding classifiers, while also shedding light on the sequence properties that distinguish lncRNA sequences.
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.