<i>In Silico</i> Protein Interaction Analysis Using the Global Proteome Machine Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experiments to probe for protein-protein interactions are the focus of functional proteomic studies, thus proteomic data repositories are increasingly likely to contain a large cross-section of such information. Here, we use the Global Proteome Machine database (GPMDB), which is the largest curated and publicly available proteomic data repository derived from tandem mass spectrometry, to develop an in silico protein interaction analysis tool. Using a human histone protein for method development, we positively identified an interaction partner from each histone protein family that forms the histone octameric complex. Moreover, this method, applied to the α subunits of the human proteasome, identified all of the subunits in the 20S core particle. Furthermore, we applied this approach to human integrin αIIb and integrin β3, a major receptor involved in the activation of platelets. We identified 28 proteins, including a protein network for integrin and platelet activation. In addition, proteins interacting with integrin β1 obtained using this method were validated by comparing them to those identified in a formaldehyde-supported coimmunoprecipitation experiment, protein-protein interaction databases and the literature. Our results demonstrate that in silico protein interaction analysis is a novel tool for identifying known/candidate protein-protein interactions and proteins with shared functions in a protein network.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".