We exploit the widening margin in tensor-core performance between [FP64/FP32/FP16/INT8,FP64/FP32/FP16/FP8/INT8] on NVIDIA [Ampere,Hopper] GPUs to boost the performance of output accuracy-preserving mixed-precision computation of Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) of 305K patients from the UK BioBank, the largest-ever GWAS cohort studied for genetic epistasis using a multivariate approach. Tile-centric adaptive-precision linear algebraic techniques motivated by reducing data motion gain enhanced significance with low-precision GPU arithmetic. At the core of Kernel Ridge Regression (KRR) techniques for GWAS lie compute-bound cubic-complexity matrix operations that inhibit scaling to aspirational dimensions of the population, genotypes, and phenotypes. We accelerate KRR matrix generation by redesigning the computation for Euclidean distances to engage INT8 tensor cores while exploiting symmetry. We accelerate solution of the regularized KRR systems by deploying a new four-precision Cholesky-based solver, which, at 1.805 mixed-precision ExaOp/s on a nearly full Alps system, outperforms the state-of-the-art CPU-only REGENIE GWAS software by five orders of magnitude.

Motivation: The computational search for promoters in prokaryotes remains an attractive problem in bioinformatics. Despite the attention it has received for many years, the problem has not been addressed satisfactorily. In any bacterial genome, the transcription start site is chosen mostly by the sigma (σ) factor proteins, which control the gene activation. The majority of published bacterial promoter prediction tools target σ 70 promoters in Escherichia coli . Moreover, no σ-specific classification of promoters is available for prokaryotes other than for E. coli . Results: Here, we introduce bTSSfinder, a novel tool that predicts putative promoters for five classes of σ factors in Cyanobacteria (σ A , σ C , σ H , σ G and σ F ) and for five classes of sigma factors in E. coli (σ 70 , σ 38 , σ 32 , σ 28 and σ 24 ). Comparing to currently available tools, bTSSfinder achieves higher accuracy (MCC = 0.86, F 1 -score = 0.93) compared to the next best tool with MCC = 0.59, F 1 -score = 0.79) and covers multiple classes of promoters. Availability and Implementation: bTSSfinder is available standalone and online at http://www.cbrc.kaust.edu.sa/btssfinder . Contacts: [email protected] or [email protected]. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

BACKGROUND: The rate of protein structures being deposited in the Protein Data Bank surpasses the capacity to experimentally characterise them and therefore computational methods to analyse these structures have become increasingly important. Identifying the region of the protein most likely to be involved in function is useful in order to gain information about its potential role. There are many available approaches to predict functional site, but many are not made available via a publicly-accessible application. RESULTS: Here we present a functional site prediction tool (SitesIdentify), based on combining sequence conservation information with geometry-based cleft identification, that is freely available via a web-server. We have shown that SitesIdentify compares favourably to other functional site prediction tools in a comparison of seven methods on a non-redundant set of 237 enzymes with annotated active sites. CONCLUSION: SitesIdentify is able to produce comparable accuracy in predicting functional sites to its closest available counterpart, but in addition achieves improved accuracy for proteins with few characterised homologues. SitesIdentify is available via a webserver at http://www.manchester.ac.uk/bioinformatics/sitesidentify/

BACKGROUND: Empirical binding models have previously been investigated for the energetics of protein complexation (DeltaG models) and for the influence of mutations on complexation (i.e. differences between wild-type and mutant complexes, DeltaDeltaG models). We construct binding models to directly compare these processes, which have generally been studied separately. RESULTS: Although reasonable fit models were found for both DeltaG and DeltaDeltaG cases, they differ substantially. In a dataset curated for the absence of mainchain rearrangement upon binding, non-polar area burial is a major determinant of DeltaG models. However this DeltaG model does not fit well to the data for binding differences upon mutation. Burial of non-polar area is weighted down in fitting of DeltaDeltaG models. These calculations were made with no repacking of sidechains upon complexation, and only minimal packing upon mutation. We investigated the consequences of more extensive packing changes with a modified mean-field packing scheme. Rather than emphasising solvent exposure with relatively extended sidechains, rotamers are selected that exhibit maximal packing with protein. This provides solvent accessible areas for proteins that are much closer to those of experimental structures than the more extended sidechain regime. The new packing scheme increases changes in non-polar burial for mutants compared to wild-type proteins, but does not substantially improve agreement between DeltaG and DeltaDeltaG binding models. CONCLUSION: We conclude that solvent accessible area, based on modelled mutant structures, is a poor correlate for DeltaDeltaG upon mutation. A simple volume-based, rather than solvent accessibility-based, model is constructed for DeltaG and DeltaDeltaG systems. This shows a more consistent behaviour. We discuss the efficacy of volume, as opposed to area, approaches to describe the energetic consequences of mutations at interfaces. This knowledge can be used to develop simple computational screens for binding in comparative modelled interfaces.