MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982075805 · doi:10.1109/cibcb.2005.1594924

Pathway Analyst Automated Metabolic Pathway Prediction

2005· article· en· W1982075805 on OpenAlexaff
Luca Pireddu, Brett Poulin, Duane Szafron, Philip Lu, David S. Wishart

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Metabolic pathwayHidden Markov modelComputer scienceSupport vector machineSimilarity (geometry)Computational biologyIdentification (biology)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningBiologyGeneGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metabolic pathways are crucial to our understanding of biology. The speed at which new organisms are being sequenced is outstripping our ability to experimentally determine their metabolic pathway information. In recent years several initiatives have been successful in automating the annotations of individual proteins in these organisms, either experimentally or by prediction. However, to leverage the success of metabolic pathways we need to automate their identification in our rapidly growing list of sequenced organisms. We present a prototype system for predicting the catalysts of important reactions and for organizing the predicted catalysts and reactions into previously defined metabolic pathways. We compare a variety of predictors that incorporate sequence similarity (BLAST), hidden Markov models (HMM) and Support Vector Machines (SVM). We found that there is an advantage to using different predictors for different reactions. We validate our prototype on 10 metabolic pathways across 13 organisms for which we obtained a cross-validation precision of 71.5% and recall of 91.5% in predicting the catalyst proteins of all reactions.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.007

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207