↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the effect of disturbed ensemble distributions on SCFG based statistical sampling of RNA secondary structures

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
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
Evaluating the effect of disturbed ensemble distributions on SCFG based statistical sampling of RNA secondary structures
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-13-159
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anika Scheid, Markus E Nebel

Abstract

Over the past years, statistical and Bayesian approaches have become increasingly appreciated to address the long-standing problem of computational RNA structure prediction. Recently, a novel probabilistic method for the prediction of RNA secondary structures from a single sequence has been studied which is based on generating statistically representative and reproducible samples of the entire ensemble of feasible structures for a particular input sequence. This method samples the possible foldings from a distribution implied by a sophisticated (traditional or length-dependent) stochastic context-free grammar (SCFG) that mirrors the standard thermodynamic model applied in modern physics-based prediction algorithms. Specifically, that grammar represents an exact probabilistic counterpart to the energy model underlying the Sfold software, which employs a sampling extension of the partition function (PF) approach to produce statistically representative subsets of the Boltzmann-weighted ensemble. Although both sampling approaches have the same worst-case time and space complexities, it has been indicated that they differ in performance (both with respect to prediction accuracy and quality of generated samples), where neither of these two competing approaches generally outperforms the other.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 10%
Unknown 9 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 2 20%
Student > Master 2 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 20%
Researcher 2 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 4 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 30%
Engineering 2 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 July 2012.
All research outputs
#20,160,460
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,820
of 7,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,259
of 164,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#84
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,247 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 164,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.