The use of proteotypic peptide libraries for protein identification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes an algorithm to apply proteotypic peptide sequence libraries to protein identifications performed using tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS). Proteotypic peptides are those peptides in a protein sequence that are most likely to be confidently observed by current MS-based proteomics methods. Libraries of proteotypic peptide sequences were compiled from the Global Proteome Machine Database for Homo sapiens and Saccharomyces cerevisiae model species proteomes. These libraries were used to scan through collections of tandem mass spectra to discover which proteins were represented by the data sets, followed by detailed analysis of the spectra with the full protein sequences corresponding to the discovered proteotypic peptides. This algorithm (Proteotypic Peptide Profiling, or P3) resulted in sequence-to-spectrum matches comparable to those obtained by conventional protein identification algorithms using only full protein sequences, with a 20-fold reduction in the time required to perform the identification calculations. The proteotypic peptide libraries, the open source code for the implementation of the search algorithm and a website for using the software have been made freely available. Approximately 4% of the residues in the H. sapiens proteome were required in the proteotypic peptide library to successfully identify proteins.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".