MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048299923 · doi:10.1039/c4mb00410h

Predicting protein–protein interactions between human and hepatitis C virus <i>via</i> an ensemble learning method

2014· article· en· W2048299923 on OpenAlexaff
Abbasali Emamjomeh, Bahram Goliaei, Javad Zahiri, Reza Ebrahimpour

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular BioSystems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatitis a virusEnsemble learningHepatitis C virusComputational biologyVirologyComputer scienceBiologyVirusArtificial intelligenceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An estimated 170 million people, approximately 3% of the world population, are chronically infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV). More than 350,000 deaths are reported annually, which are caused by HCV. HCV, similar to a variety of viruses, causes disease in humans by altering protein-protein interactions within the host cells. Experimental approaches for the detection of host-virus PPIs have many inherent limitations. Computational approaches to predict these interactions are therefore of significant importance. While many studies have been developed to predict intra-species PPIs in the last decade, predictions on inter-species PPIs such as human-HCV PPIs are rare. In this study, we developed an ensemble learning method to predict PPIs between human and HCV proteins. Our model utilises four well-established diverse learners as base classifiers including random forest (RF), Naïve Bayes (NB), support vector machine (SVM) and multilayer perceptron (MLP). In addition, an MLP was used as a meta-learner to combine base learners' predictions to provide the final prediction. To encode human and HCV proteins as feature vectors, we used six different descriptors as follows: amino acid composition (ACC), pseudo amino acid composition (PAC), evolutionary information feature, network centrality measures, tissue information and post-translational modification information. To assess the prediction power of the proposed method, we assembled a benchmark dataset composed of confident positive and negative PPIs. In a 10-fold cross-validation experiment, our prediction method achieved accuracy and specificity as high as 83% and 94%, respectively. Furthermore, in an independent test set the proposed method achieved an accuracy of 84% and a specificity of 92%. When compared with the existing method, our method showed a better performance. These results revealed that our method is suitable for performing PPI prediction in a host-pathogen context.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations52
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular BioSystemsSame topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207