MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979548025 · doi:10.1142/s0219720011005355

IMPROVED SEQUENCE-BASED PREDICTION OF STRAND RESIDUES

2010· article· en· W1979548025 on OpenAlexaff
Kanaka Durga Kedarisetti, Marcin J. Mizianty, Scott Dick, Lukasz Kurgan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputational biologyClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceBiological systemBiologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate identification of strand residues aids prediction and analysis of numerous structural and functional aspects of proteins. We propose a sequence-based predictor, BETArPRED, which improves prediction of strand residues and β-strand segments. BETArPRED uses a novel design that accepts strand residues predicted by SSpro and predicts the remaining positions utilizing a logistic regression classifier with nine custom-designed features. These are derived from the primary sequence, the secondary structure (SS) predicted by SSpro, PSIPRED and SPINE, and residue depth as predicted by RDpred. Our features utilize certain local (window-based) patterns in the predicted SS and combine information about the predicted SS and residue depth. BETArPRED is evaluated on 432 sequences that share low identity with the training chains, and on the CASP8 dataset. We compare BETArPRED with seven modern SS predictors, and the top-performing automated structure predictor in CASP8, the ZHANG-server. BETArPRED provides statistically significant improvements over each of the SS predictors; it improves prediction of strand residues and β-strands, and it finds β-strands that were missed by the other methods. When compared with the ZHANG-server, we improve predictions of strand segments and predict more actual strand residues, while the other predictor achieves higher rate of correct strand residue predictions when under-predicting them.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational BiologySame topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207