Cited by 1,268Genomics and Chromatin DynamicsGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesGene Regulatory Network Analysis

Assessing computational tools for the discovery of transcription factor binding sites

Open access
Tompa, Martin, Li, Nan, Bailey, Timothy L, Church, George M, De Moor, Bart, Eskin, Eleazar, Favorov, Alexander V, Frith, Martin C +17 more·2005·Nature Biotechnology

Abstract

The prediction of regulatory elements is a problem where computational methods offer great hope. Over the past few years, numerous tools have become available for this task. The purpose of the current assessment is twofold: to provide some guidance to users regarding the accuracy of currently available tools in various settings, and to provide a benchmark of data sets for assessing future tools.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nbt1053

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Computational approaches to predict physical interactions can partly circumvent bias but do not address tissue specificity and may have relatively low reproducibility across methods.

    “Computational approaches to predict physical interactions can partly circumvent bias (TABLE 1), but they do not address tissue specificity, and there may be relatively low reproducibility across different methods 58,59.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Altman, R. et al.). 269-278 (AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, 2000).
  2. Bourbakis, N.G.). 214-220 (IEEE Computer Society, New York, 2003).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tompa, M., Li, N., Bailey, T. L., Church, G. M., De Moor, B., Eskin, E., Favorov, A. V., Frith, M. C., Fu, Y., Kent, W. J., Makeev, V. J., Mironov, A. A., Noble, W. S., Pavesi, G., Pesole, G., Régnier, M., Simonis, N., Sinha, S., Thijs, G., van Helden, J., Vandenbogaert, M., Weng, Z., Workman, C., Ye, C., & Zhu, Z.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology (RU)
  • Boston University (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • Lomonosov Moscow State University (RU)
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique (FR)
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
  • Rockefeller University (US)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Tompa, Martin
Venue
Nature Biotechnology
Published
2005-01
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
137-144
ISSN
  • 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0156
  • 1546-1696
OpenAlex
W2141408320
Cited by
1,268
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 49 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 79 · 2012: 90
FWCI
53.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL AMU (submittedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Bari Aldo Moro) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0218798, 0116574)
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • Cancer Research Institute
  • W. M. Keck Foundation
  • Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research
  • European Commission
  • Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles
  • Vlaamse regering
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Russian Academy of Sciences
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01 HG 02602, R01HG003110, 1R01HG03110, R01HG002602)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
Keywords
transcription factor binding sites, regulatory element prediction, computational tools, benchmarking, benchmark dataset, gene expression regulation
MeSH terms
Animals, Binding Sites, Drosophila, Fungal Proteins, Humans, Software, Transcription, Genetic, Reproducibility of Results, Gene Expression, Computational Biology, Internet, Amino Acid Motifs, Databases, Protein, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review