Detection of Locally Over-Represented GO Terms in Protein-Protein Interaction Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-throughput methods for identifying protein-protein interactions produce increasingly complex and intricate interaction networks. These networks are extremely rich in information, but extracting biologically meaningful hypotheses from them and representing them in a human-readable manner is challenging. We propose a method to identify Gene Ontology terms that are locally over-represented in a subnetwork of a given biological network. Specifically, we propose several methods to evaluate the degree of clustering of proteins associated to a particular GO term in both weighted and unweighted PPI networks, and describe efficient methods to estimate the statistical significance of the observed clustering. We show, using Monte Carlo simulations, that our best approximation methods accurately estimate the true p-value, for random scale-free graphs as well as for actual yeast and human networks. When applied to these two biological networks, our approach recovers many known complexes and pathways, but also suggests potential functions for many subnetworks. Online Supplementary Material is available at www.liebertonline.com.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".