Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,567

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improved Splice Site Detection in Genie

REESE, MARTIN G., EECKMAN, FRANK H., KULP, DAVID, HAUSSLER, DAVID·1997·Journal of Computational Biology

Abstract

We present an improved splice site predictor for the genefinding program Genie. Genie is based on a generalized Hidden Markov Model (GHMM) that describes the grammar of a legal parse of a multi-exon gene in a DNA sequence. In Genie, probabilities are estimated for gene features by using dynamic programming to combine information from multiple content and signal sensors, including sensors that integrate matches to homologous sequences from a database. One of the hardest problems in genefinding is to determine the complete gene structure correctly. The splice site sensors are the key signal sensors that address this problem. We replaced the existing splice site sensors in Genie with two novel neural networks based on dinucleotide frequencies. Using these novel sensors, Genie shows significant improvements in the sensitivity and specificity of gene structure identification. Experimental results in tests using a standard set of annotated genes showed that Genie identified 86% of coding nucleotides correctly with a specificity of 85%, versus 80% and 84% in the older system. In further splice site experiments, we also looked at correlations between splice site scores and intron and exon lengths, as well as at the effect of distance to the nearest splice site on false positive rates.

Overview

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 · 10.1089/cmb.1997.4.311

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. 10.1016/S0092-8240(89)80047-3 · doi:10.1016/s0092-8240(89)80047-3
  2. 10.1016/0097-8485(93)85004-V · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90380-O · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1006/geno.1996.0298 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Dong S., 1994, Genomics, 162, 705
  6. 10.1093/nar/20.24.6441 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1016/0303-2647(93)90069-O · doi:10.1016/0303-2647(93)90069-o
  8. 10.1016/0022-2836(92)90130-C · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1006/jmbi.1994.1104 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1101/gr.6.2.71 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/0025-5564(92)90075-8 · doi:10.1016/0025-5564(92)90075-8
  12. 10.1016/0076-6879(90)83018-5 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1016/0092-8674(94)90130-9 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1093/nar/21.3.607 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1093/nar/22.24.5156 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1093/nar/12.1Part2.505 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1073/pnas.88.24.11261 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 1,567

Metadata

Authors
REESE, M. G., EECKMAN, F. H., KULP, D., & HAUSSLER, D.
Venue
Journal of Computational Biology
Published
1997-01
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
311-323
ISSN
  • 1066-5277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-8666
OpenAlex
W4247292500
Cited by
1,567
References
1
FWCI
3.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.liebertpub.com/nv/resources-tools/text-and-data-mining-policy/121/ (tdm)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improved Splice Site Detection in Genie. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/cmb.1997.4.311
The paper
REESE, M. G., EECKMAN, F. H., KULP, D., & HAUSSLER, D. (1997). Improved Splice Site Detection in Genie. Journal of Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.1089/cmb.1997.4.311

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.