Prediction of HLA-A2 binding peptides using Bayesian network
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prediction of peptides binding to HLA (human leukocyte antigen) finds application in peptide vaccine design. A number of statistical and structural models have been developed in recent years for HLA binding peptide prediction. However, a Bayesian Network (BNT) model is not available. In this study we describe a BNT model for HLA-A2 binding peptide prediction. It has been demonstrated that the BNT model allows up to 99 % accurate identification of the HLA-A2 binding peptides and provides similar prediction accuracy compared to HMM (Hidden Markov Model) and ANN (Artificial Neural Network). At the same time, it has been shown that the BNT has that advantage that it allows more accurate performance for smaller sets of empirical data compared to the HMM and the ANN methods. When the size of the training set has been reduced to 40% from the original data, the identification of the HLA-A2 binding peptides by the BNT, ANN and HMM methods produced ARoc (area under receiver operating characteristic) values 0.88, 0.85, 0.85 respectively. The results of the work demonstrate certain advantages of using the Bayesian Networks in predicting the HLA binding peptides using smaller datasets.
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 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 it