↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of energy-based algorithms for RNA secondary structure prediction

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Analysis of energy-based algorithms for RNA secondary structure prediction
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-13-22
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monir Hajiaghayi, Anne Condon, Holger H Hoos

Abstract

RNA molecules play critical roles in the cells of organisms, including roles in gene regulation, catalysis, and synthesis of proteins. Since RNA function depends in large part on its folded structures, much effort has been invested in developing accurate methods for prediction of RNA secondary structure from the base sequence. Minimum free energy (MFE) predictions are widely used, based on nearest neighbor thermodynamic parameters of Mathews, Turner et al. or those of Andronescu et al. Some recently proposed alternatives that leverage partition function calculations find the structure with maximum expected accuracy (MEA) or pseudo-expected accuracy (pseudo-MEA) methods. Advances in prediction methods are typically benchmarked using sensitivity, positive predictive value and their harmonic mean, namely F-measure, on datasets of known reference structures. Since such benchmarks document progress in improving accuracy of computational prediction methods, it is important to understand how measures of accuracy vary as a function of the reference datasets and whether advances in algorithms or thermodynamic parameters yield statistically significant improvements. Our work advances such understanding for the MFE and (pseudo-)MEA-based methods, with respect to the latest datasets and energy parameters.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 78 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 20%
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 8 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 24%
Computer Science 6 7%
Engineering 4 5%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 9 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2012.
All research outputs
#14,724,504
of 22,662,201 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#5,027
of 7,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,489
of 247,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#40
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,662,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 247,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.