Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global Distance Test (GDT) is one of the commonly accepted measures to assess the quality of predicted protein structures. Given a set of distance thresholds, GDT maximizes the percentage of superimposed (or matched) residue pairs under each threshold, and reports the average of these percentages as the final score. The computation of GDT score was conjectured to be NP-hard. All available methods are heuristic and do not guarantee the optimality of scores. These heuristic strategies usually result in underestimated GDT scores. Contrary to the conjecture, the problem can be solved exactly in polynomial time, albeit the method would be too slow for practical usage. In this paper we propose an efficient tool called OptGDT to obtain GDT scores with theoretically guaranteed accuracies. Denote ℓ as the number of matched residue pairs found by OptGDT for a given threshold d. Let ℓ' be the optimal number of matched residues pairs for threshold d/(1 + ε), where ε is a parameter in our computation. OptGDT guarantees that ℓ ≥ ℓ'. We applied our tool to CASP8 (The eighth Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction Techniques) data. For 87.3% of the predicted models, better GDT scores are obtained when OptGDT is used. In some cases, the number of matched residue pairs were improved by at least 10%. The tool runs in time O(n³) log n/ε⁵) for a given threshold d and parameter ε. In the case of globular proteins, the tool can be improved to a randomized algorithm of O(n log² n) runtime with probability at least 1 - O(1/n). Released under the GPL license and downloadable from http://bioinformatics.uwaterloo.ca/∼scli/OptGDT/ .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".