← Browse entries

BOI2

S. cerevisiae

Boi2p

What the model saw

Gene: BOI2
Organism: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Known functions: Boi2p. phospholipid binding. protein binding.
View unredacted entry
Boi2p. phospholipid binding. protein binding.

Solver output

Predicted influence
Unclear
Confidence
30%
Mechanism
Unclear
Reasoning

BOI2 (Boi2p) in S. cerevisiae is annotated with phospholipid binding and protein binding activities. Phospholipid binding can implicate roles in membrane dynamics, vesicular trafficking, or signaling, but none of these are specifically resolved by the available annotations. Protein binding is too broad to assign a specific aging-relevant pathway. BOI2 is a BAR domain-containing protein involved in cell polarity and budding (interacting with Bem1p and Rho GTPases), but these functional details are not captured in the provided GO terms. Without more specific molecular function data linking BOI2 to a defined longevity-relevant pathway such as nutrient sensing, autophagy, or proteostasis, a confident directional prediction cannot be made.

Key pathways
phospholipid bindingprotein-protein interactioncell polarity signaling
Longevity influence
Anti-longevity
Lifespan effect
Increase

GenAge curators classify each gene's normal function as promoting (Pro-Longevity) or opposing (Anti-Longevity) longevity, based on synthesis across studies. Loss-of-function effects can vary from this depending on the manipulation.

Advisor judgment

Answer
Incorrect
Mechanism
Incorrect
Reasoning quality
2/5
Failure mode
Appropriately uncertain
Notes

The model predicted "unclear" with low confidence (0.3), while the ground truth is "anti_longevity." The model correctly identified some relevant biology (BAR domain, cell polarity, Bem1p/Rho GTPase interactions) but failed to commit to a directional prediction. BOI2 is an anti-longevity gene in yeast, meaning its deletion extends lifespan. The model's reasoning about phospholipid binding and protein binding being insufficient to make a directional call is understandable given the limited information provided, but the model did mention cell polarity signaling as a key pathway without connecting it to aging. The prediction is wrong but the uncertainty is somewhat justified given the sparse annotations provided. The model's reasoning quality is modest - it correctly identifies some relevant biology but doesn't leverage it to make a prediction.

Raw API responses

solver

{
  "reasoning": "BOI2 (Boi2p) in S. cerevisiae is annotated with phospholipid binding and protein binding activities. Phospholipid binding can implicate roles in membrane dynamics, vesicular trafficking, or signaling, but none of these are specifically resolved by the available annotations. Protein binding is too broad to assign a specific aging-relevant pathway. BOI2 is a BAR domain-containing protein involved in cell polarity and budding (interacting with Bem1p and Rho GTPases), but these functional details are not captured in the provided GO terms. Without more specific molecular function data linking BOI2 to a defined longevity-relevant pathway such as nutrient sensing, autophagy, or proteostasis, a confident directional prediction cannot be made.",
  "confidence": 0.3,
  "key_pathways": [
    "phospholipid binding",
    "protein-protein interaction",
    "cell polarity signaling"
  ],
  "mechanism_class": "unclear",
  "longevity_influence": "unclear"
}

advisor

{
  "notes": "The model predicted \"unclear\" with low confidence (0.3), while the ground truth is \"anti_longevity.\" The model correctly identified some relevant biology (BAR domain, cell polarity, Bem1p/Rho GTPase interactions) but failed to commit to a directional prediction. BOI2 is an anti-longevity gene in yeast, meaning its deletion extends lifespan. The model's reasoning about phospholipid binding and protein binding being insufficient to make a directional call is understandable given the limited information provided, but the model did mention cell polarity signaling as a key pathway without connecting it to aging. The prediction is wrong but the uncertainty is somewhat justified given the sparse annotations provided. The model's reasoning quality is modest - it correctly identifies some relevant biology but doesn't leverage it to make a prediction.",
  "failure_mode": "appropriately_uncertain",
  "answer_correct": false,
  "mechanism_correct": false,
  "reasoning_quality": 2,
  "ground_truth_questionable": false
}