2022
DOI: 10.34133/2022/9780293
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accurate Identification of DNA Replication Origin by Fusing Epigenomics and Chromatin Interaction Information

Abstract: DNA replication initiation is a complex process involving various genetic and epigenomic signatures. The correct identification of replication origins (ORIs) could provide important clues for the study of a variety of diseases caused by replication. Here, we design a computational approach named iORI-Epi to recognize ORIs by incorporating epigenome-based features, sequence-based features, and 3D genome-based features. The iORI-Epi displays excellent robustness and generalization ability on both training datase… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The precision ( P ), recall ( R ), accuracy (ACC), and F 1 score were computed to measure the performance of models across the prediction process. According to the definition of these evaluation quantities, they can be expressed as follows P = TP TP + FP R = TP TP + FN ACC = TP + FP TP + FP + TN + FN F 1 score = 2 italicPR P + R where TP, TN, FP, and FN represent the samples’ true positive, true negative, false positive, and false negative, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The precision ( P ), recall ( R ), accuracy (ACC), and F 1 score were computed to measure the performance of models across the prediction process. According to the definition of these evaluation quantities, they can be expressed as follows P = TP TP + FP R = TP TP + FN ACC = TP + FP TP + FP + TN + FN F 1 score = 2 italicPR P + R where TP, TN, FP, and FN represent the samples’ true positive, true negative, false positive, and false negative, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, there are three main test methods to evaluate the prediction results: the re-substitution test, the Jackknife test and the k-fold cross-validation test (Zhang et al, 2020;Zhang et al, 2021b;Deng et al, 2021;Liu et al, 2021;Tabaie et al, 2021;Ao et al, 2022a;Dai et al, 2022;Dao et al, 2022;Jin et al, 2022;Wei et al, 2022;Xiao et al, 2022;Zhou et al, 2022). Chou and Zhang have discussed in depth the classification performance estimation in bioinformatics and found the Jackknife test and k-fold cross-validation test have extrapolation ability in statistics (Malik et al, 2021;Hasan et al, 2022).…”
Section: Evaluation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, we also investigated the performance of SVM, 40 Random Forest (RF), 41 Logistic Regression (LR), 42 K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), 43 AdaBoost, 44 GradientBoosting(GB), 45 and LightGBM(LGBM). 46 Because these algorithms were inferior to XGBoost in performance comparison, we will not introduce them in detail.…”
Section: Feature Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%