The DOI matches its Crossref record.
An Assessment of Gene Prediction Accuracy in Large DNA Sequences
Open accessAbstract
One of the first useful products from the human genome will be a set of predicted genes. Besides its intrinsic scientific interest, the accuracy and completeness of this data set is of considerable importance for human health and medicine. Though progress has been made on computational gene identification in terms of both methods and accuracy evaluation measures, most of the sequence sets in which the programs are tested are short genomic sequences, and there is concern that these accuracy measures may not extrapolate well to larger, more challenging data sets. Given the absence of experimentally verified large genomic data sets, we constructed a semiartificial test set comprising a number of short single-gene genomic sequences with randomly generated intergenic regions. This test set, which should still present an easier problem than real human genomic sequence, mimics the ∼200kb long BACs being sequenced. In our experiments with these longer genomic sequences, the accuracy of GENSCAN, one of the most accurate ab initio gene prediction programs, dropped significantly, although its sensitivity remained high. Conversely, the accuracy of similarity-based programs, such as GENEWISE,PROCRUSTES, and BLASTX, was not affected significantly by the presence of random intergenic sequence, but depended on the strength of the similarity to the protein homolog. As expected, the accuracy dropped if the models were built using more distant homologs, and we were able to quantitatively estimate this decline. However, the specificities of these techniques are still rather good even when the similarity is weak, which is a desirable characteristic for driving expensive follow-up experiments. Our experiments suggest that though gene prediction will improve with every new protein that is discovered and through improvements in the current set of tools, we still have a long way to go before we can decipher the precise exonic structure of every gene in the human genome using purely computational methodology.
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
Cited by
Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome
International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium, Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, C. F. G. R., Lander, E. S., Linton, L. M., Birren, B., Nusbaum, C., Zody, M. C., Baldwin, J., Devon, K., Dewar, K., et al. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35057062 · Cited by 24,216
Birney, E., Clamp, M., & Durbin, R. (2004) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.1865504 · Cited by 2,542
Blom, N., Sicheritz‐Pontén, T., Gupta, R., Gammeltoft, S., & Brunak, S. (2004) · PROTEOMICS · doi:10.1002/pmic.200300771 · Cited by 2,069
Gene prediction with a hidden Markov model and a new intron submodel
Stanke, M., & Waack, S. (2003) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btg1080 · Cited by 1,439
Stanke, M., Schöffmann, O., Morgenstern, B., & Waack, S. (2006) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-7-62 · Cited by 1,304
Metadata
- Authors
- Guigó, R., Agarwal, P., Abril, J. F., Burset, M., & Fickett, J. W.
- Venue
- Genome Research
- Publisher
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- Published
- 2000-10-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1631-1642
- ISSN
- 1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-5469
- OpenAlex
- W1864675704
- Cited by
- 214
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: An Assessment of Gene Prediction Accuracy in Large DNA Sequences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.122800
- The paper
- Guigó, R., Agarwal, P., Abril, J. F., Burset, M., & Fickett, J. W. (2000). An Assessment of Gene Prediction Accuracy in Large DNA Sequences. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.122800
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.