Protein secondary structure prediction using an evolutionary computation method and clustering
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we evaluated the performance of an evolutionary-based protein secondary structure (PSS) prediction model which uses the information of amino acid sequences extracted by a clustering technique. The dimension of the classifier's inputs is reduced using a k-means clustering method on sequence segments. The proposed PSS classifier is based on a Genetic Programming (GP) approach that uses IF rules for a multi-target classifier. The GP classifier is evaluated by using protein sequences and the sequence information obtained from the k-means clustering. The GP prediction model's performance is compared with those of feed-forward artificial neural networks (ANNs) and support vector machines (SVMs). The prediction methods are examined with two protein datasets RS126 and CB513. The performance of the three classification models are measured according to Q <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">3</sub> and segment overlap (SOV) scores. The prediction models which use clustered data result in average 2% higher prediction accuracy than those using sequence data. In addition, the experimental results indicate the GP model's prediction scores are in average 3% higher than those of the ANN and SVMs models when amino acid sequences or clustered information are explored.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it