ReviewBriefings in bioinformatics2025
A conceptual framework for human-AI collaborative genome annotation.
Review in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational identification and characterization of noncoding RNA-encoded peptides: tools, databases, and in silico strategies.Amino acids · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Drives Advances in Multi-Omics Analysis and Precision Medicine for Sepsis.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Challenges and opportunities: computational biology and the future of agriculture.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome annotation is essential for understanding the functional elements within genomes. While automated methods are indispensable for processing large-scale genomic data, they often face challenges in accurately predicting gene structures and functions. Consequently, manual curation by domain experts remains crucial for validating and refining these predictions. These combined outcomes from automated tools and manual curation highlight the importance of integrating human expertise with artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities to improve both the accuracy and efficiency of genome annotation. However, the manual curation process is inherently labor-intensive and time-consuming, making it difficult to scale for large datasets. To address these challenges, we propose a conceptual framework, Human-AI Collaborative Genome Annotation (HAICoGA), that leverages the synergistic partnership between humans and AI to enhance human capabilities and accelerate the genome annotation process. Additionally, we explore the potential of integrating large language models into this framework to support and augment specific tasks. Finally, we discuss emerging challenges and outline open research questions to guide further exploration in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.