MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987659734 · doi:10.1145/2506583.2512372

Prediction of Biological Protein-protein Interaction Types Using Short-Linear Motifs

2013· article· en· W1987659734 on OpenAlexaff
Manish Pandit, Luis Rueda, Alioune Ngom

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupport vector machineComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Protein–protein interactionCurse of dimensionalityObligateDimensionality reductionArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Computational biologyData miningBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein-protein interactions (PPIs) play a key role in many biological processes and functions in living cells. Thus, identification, prediction, and analysis of PPIs are important aspects in molecular biology. We propose a computational model to predict biological PPI types using short-linear motifs (SLiMs). The information contained in protein sequences is used to distinguish between interaction types, namely obligate and non-obligate. Classifiers, such as k-nearest neighbor (k-NN), support vector machine (SVM) and linear dimensionality reduction (LDR) on two well-known datasets confirm the power of the proposed model with accuracy above 99%. The results show that the information contained in the training sequences is crucial for prediction and analysis of biological PPIs.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207