FragAnchor: A Large-Scale Predictor of Glycosylphosphatidylinositol Anchors in Eukaryote Protein Sequences by Qualitative Scoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchor is a common but complex C-terminal post-translational modification of extracellular proteins in eukaryotes. Here we investigate the problem of correctly annotating GPI-anchored proteins for the growing number of sequences in public databases. We developed a computational system, called FragAnchor, based on the tandem use of a neural network (NN) and a hidden Markov model (HMM). Firstly, NN selects potential GPI-anchored proteins in a dataset, then HMM parses these potential GPI signals and refines the prediction by qualitative scoring. FragAnchor correctly predicted 91% of all the GPI-anchored proteins annotated in the Swiss-Prot database. In a large-scale analysis of 29 eukaryote proteomes, FragAnchor predicted that the percentage of highly probable GPI-anchored proteins is between 0.21% and 2.01%. The distinctive feature of FragAnchor, compared with other systems, is that it targets only the C-terminus of a protein, making it less sensitive to the background noise found in databases and possible incomplete protein sequences. Moreover, FragAnchor can be used to predict GPI-anchored proteins in all eukaryotes. Finally, by using qualitative scoring, the predictions combine both sensitivity and information content. The predictor is publicly available at [see text].
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".