<i>PeakSelect</i> : preprocessing tandem mass spectra for better peptide identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a new preprocessing method, PeakSelect, to improve the accuracy and efficiency of Tandem Mass-Spec peptide (protein) identification. The fundamental difference between noise and fragment ions in spectra is that ions have isotopes but noise does not. We propose a new and important concept of an Isotope Pattern Vector (IPV) which characterizes the isotope cluster of fragment ions. Then the noise and real peaks can be distinguished by the quantitative IPV values. PeakSelect first uses a new method of the Gaussian Mixture Model and Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm to find the base intensity level (baseline) in a spectrum. Then PeakSelect selects features based on the IPV and baseline, and constructs a decision tree to automatically classify the peaks into different categories such as noise, single ion peaks, and overlapping peaks. Experiments show that PeakSelect can help to reduce the Mascot searching time and increase the reliability of peptide identifications. In particular, PeakSelect performs well on complex spectra with a large number of peaks from large peptides, and supports more sequence identification than other well-known systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".