Datasets
RMBase v3.0 and multiple experimentally annotated RNA modification datasets supply positive and negative examples.
Human RNA methylation-site classification is evaluated on a curated, balanced dataset and an independent test partition.
RMBase v3.0 and multiple experimentally annotated RNA modification datasets supply positive and negative examples.
Accuracy, F1, precision, recall, AUROC, AUPR and MCC; cross-validation results are averaged across folds.
RNA sequence windows around candidate modification sites.
Conceptual summary of the cited evaluation; exact task configuration and source version remain part of the protocol.
limited source coverage · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. All specifications and missing details
Each comparison retains its reviewed evaluation scope, dataset and metric. Results are shown without a pooled ranking.
ACC (fraction) · Higher values are better.
Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation (human RNA 2-prime-O-methylation site prediction) · human RNA 2OMe sites
Evidence origin: Author-reported evaluation.
2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Performance comparison of 2OMe-LM and deep learning baseline models using 5-fold CV. a; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 2 GloVe + MLP, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 3 GloVe + TextCNN + MLP, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 4 GloVe + Transformer + MLP, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 5 Word2vec + MLP, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 6 Word2vec + TextCNN + MLP, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 7 Word2Vec + Transformer + MLP, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC; Table 1. (btaf417-T1), row 8 2OMe-LM, column 2: Human RNA 2OMe sites, five-fold cross-validation ACC41-nt centred RNA windows; balanced 8,037 positive and 8,037 negative samples after 80% identity filtering, then 8:2 train/test division. Average of five validation folds of the training set.
Automated source review: 2026-09-17. Numerical source review does not establish independent reproduction.
Dots show point estimates. Whiskers show only explicitly defined uncertainty (standard deviation, standard error or a labelled interval); their definitions remain in Table. Unresolved uncertainty is not plotted. Differences do not establish statistical significance.
Showing 7 of 7 matching rows.
RMBase v3.0 and multiple experimentally annotated RNA modification datasets supply positive and negative examples. An 80:20 training/test partition is followed by five-fold cross-validation within training data. Accuracy, F1, precision, recall, AUROC, AUPR and MCC; cross-validation results are averaged across folds. GloVe/word2vec neural baselines; NmRF, H2Opred and Meta-2OM web servers; BERT2OME retrained on the benchmark. The checked dataset/split passages specify sample partitioning but do not specify a gene-, donor- or overlapping-window exclusion rule. The cited text-accessible evaluation sections give no confidence-interval, resampling or repeat-run error-bar specification. Image-only tables and uninspected supplements are outside this absence claim.
Benchmarks bring together tasks and protocols. A task describes the biological question; a protocol defines a particular test.
These source-backed links do not make different protocols or scores interchangeable.
Choose a concrete protocol before running an evaluation. Its inputs, split and scoring rules determine which results can be compared.
No runnable recipe has been reviewed for this task. Dataset access, model requirements, licences and compute requirements must be checked against its sources before execution.
A task describes a biological question. Choose a linked protocol to obtain concrete split and scoring instructions.
No source-reviewed explanatory claims are recorded here yet.
Task-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced.
Stable record: reported-task-82fc7843f07324Explanatory profile: limited source coverage · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. Review applies to the cited claims; unresolved fields are listed below. Numerical results retain their own review status.
| Property | Description and evidence |
|---|---|
| Datasets | RMBase v3.0 and multiple experimentally annotated RNA modification datasets supply positive and negative examples.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Splits | An 80:20 training/test partition is followed by five-fold cross-validation within training data.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Metrics | Accuracy, F1, precision, recall, AUROC, AUPR and MCC; cross-validation results are averaged across folds.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Baselines | GloVe/word2vec neural baselines; NmRF, H2Opred and Meta-2OM web servers; BERT2OME retrained on the benchmark.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Leakage controls | The checked dataset/split passages specify sample partitioning but do not specify a gene-, donor- or overlapping-window exclusion rule. · Not reported in inspected sourcesSources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Uncertainty | The cited text-accessible evaluation sections give no confidence-interval, resampling or repeat-run error-bar specification. Image-only tables and uninspected supplements are outside this absence claim. · Not reported in inspected sourcesSources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Entity type | Paper-specific computational evaluation protocol.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Organisms | Human.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Assays | RNA modification-site annotations from RMBase and experimental datasets.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Allowed inputs | RNA sequence windows around candidate modification sites.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
| Adaptation | Supervised site classifier; comparator servers and retrained models have distinct training provenance.Sources2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model · Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 |
Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.
Last literature check: 2026-09-17. Dated primary-source discovery and protocol/table screening. Source checking does not mean experimental reproduction. Only separately extracted and independently reviewed numeric batches are publishable.
| Paper or primary resource | Version | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model | journal full text in PMC | Read source |
The catalogue now holds 84 result rows for this benchmark. A note below about pending extraction describes the state on 2026-09-17 and may since have been answered by a later batch. The result rows and their sources are the current record.
complete tables extracted
Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.
One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.
17 evidence rows matching the loaded filters
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|---|---|
| Diagram caption Conceptual summary of the cited evaluation; exact task configuration and source version remain part of the protocol. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
Diagram steps
| 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Diagram title Computational evaluation flow Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Datasets RMBase v3.0 and multiple experimentally annotated RNA modification datasets supply positive and negative examples. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Splits An 80:20 training/test partition is followed by five-fold cross-validation within training data. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Adaptation Supervised site classifier; comparator servers and retrained models have distinct training provenance. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Metrics Accuracy, F1, precision, recall, AUROC, AUPR and MCC; cross-validation results are averaged across folds. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Baselines GloVe/word2vec neural baselines; NmRF, H2Opred and Meta-2OM web servers; BERT2OME retrained on the benchmark. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Leakage controls The checked dataset/split passages specify sample partitioning but do not specify a gene-, donor- or overlapping-window exclusion rule. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | unreported automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Uncertainty The cited text-accessible evaluation sections give no confidence-interval, resampling or repeat-run error-bar specification. Image-only tables and uninspected supplements are outside this absence claim. Individual claims | 2OMe-LM: predicting 2′-O-methylation sites in human RNA using a pre-trained RNA language model Methods §§2.1, 2.4; Results §§3.1–3.2; cached text lines 11–14, 35–36, 43–48 Version: journal full text in PMC | unreported automated source review · 2026-09-16 Audit detailsTask-specific computational methodology and field context checked in the cited primary-source artifact. Source-backed fields, inapplicable evaluator dimensions and unresolved details are distinguished. Numerical results were not reproduced. Field: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
View linked audit checks and correction history
Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220 · Record review: needs review
Stable ID: reported-task-82fc7843f07324