The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pipeline to explore information on genome editing using large language models and genome editing meta-database
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1093/database/baaf022 · Paper page
Abstract
Genome editing (GE) is widely recognized as an effective and valuable technology in life sciences research. However, certain genes are difficult to edit depending on some factors such as the type of species, sequences, and GE tools. Therefore, confirming the presence or absence of GE practices in previous publications is crucial for the effectively design and establishment of research using GE. Although the Genome Editing Meta-database (GEM: https://bonohu.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/gem/ ) aims to provide as comprehensive GE information as possible, it does not indicate how each registered gene is involved in GE. In this study, we developed a systematic method for extracting essential GE information using large language models from the information based on GEM and GE-related articles. This approach allows for a systematic and efficient investigation of GE information that cannot be achieved using the current GEM alone. In addition, by converting the extracted GE information into metrics, we propose a potential application of this method to prioritize genes for future research. The extracted GE information and novel GE-related scores are expected to facilitate the efficient selection of target genes for GE and support the design of research using GE. Database Tool URLs: https://github.com/szktkyk/extract_geinfo , https://github.com/szktkyk/visualize_geinfo
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Functional unknomics: Systematic screening of conserved genes of unknown function
Rocha, J. J., Jayaram, S. A., Stevens, T. J., Muschalik, N., Shah, R. D., Emran, S., Robles, C., Freeman, M., & Munro, S. (2023) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002222 · Cited by 70
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 32
- 10.1101/cshperspect.a023754 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.93.3.1156 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1534/genetics.110.120717 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.1225829 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nature17946 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41586-019-1711-4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cell.2014.09.029 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/febs.13248 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ggedit.2022.100018 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.ggedit.2022.100024 · DOI
- 10.1038/srep19675 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nbt.2889 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s12276-024-01212-3 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.042 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.tig.2021.07.010 · DOI
- 10.1186/s12929-023-00943-1 · DOI
- 10.1038/nbt.3026 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.molp.2019.01.001 · DOI
- PubTator 3.0: an AI-powered literature resource for unlocking biomedical knowledge | Nucleic Acids Research | Oxford Academic. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/52/W1/W540/7640526. · DOI
- 10.1101/111088 · DOI
- 10.1093/database/baw005 · DOI
- Zhao, W. X. et al. A Survey of Large Language Models. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.18223 (2024). · arXiv
- 10.1038/s41467-024-45563-x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s43246-023-00441-9 · DOI
- 10.1038/s41467-024-45914-8 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41531-023-00614-w · DOI
- 10.1002/tox.23512 · DOI
- 10.3390/genes13020189 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pbio.2006643 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41592-022-01454-x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tig.2023.10.011 · DOI
- 10.7554/eLife.93429 · DOI · Paper page
Metadata
- Authors
- Suzuki, T., & Bono, H.
- Affiliations
- Hiroshima University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Bono, Hidemasa
- Venue
- Database
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2024-10-17
- Volume
- 2025
- ISSN
- 1758-0463 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC11890094
- OpenAlex
- W4408266186
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- FWCI
- 0.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Database (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University Fellowship Creation Project for Creating Scientific and Technological Innovation (JPMJFS2129)
- Japan Science and Technology Agency (JPMJFS2129, JPMJPF2010)
- Program on Open Innovation Platform with Enterprises, Research Institute and Academia (JPMJPF2010)
- Co-creation place formation support program (JPMJPF2010)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- genome editing, large language models, information extraction
- MeSH terms
- Gene Editing, Large Language Models, Animals, Humans, Programming Languages, Databases, Genetic
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