MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987231763 · doi:10.2174/092986608786071085

Function Prediction of Hypothetical Proteins Without Sequence Similarity to Proteins of Known Function (SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS)

2008· article· en· W1987231763 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein and Peptide Letters · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimilarity (geometry)Sequence (biology)Computational biologyFunction (biology)Computer scienceProtein sequencingProtein functionGenomeDomain (mathematical analysis)BioinformaticsBiologyGeneticsArtificial intelligencePeptide sequenceMathematicsGeneImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Function prediction by sequence-similarity based methods identifies only ∼50% of the proteins deduced from newly sequenced genomes. We have developed an approach to annotate the ‘leftover proteins’ i.e., those which cannot be assigned function using sequence similarity. Our method (MOPS) is pan-taxonomic, predicting fine-grained molecular function (rather than a broad functional category) with high performance. In addition, we developed a validation scheme that assesses predictions using domain-specific knowledge. Keywords: Ab initio protein function prediction, sequence-similarity-free, machine learning, decision trees, mitochondrionencoded hypothetical proteins, domain-specific validation

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.218 · 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