Identifying Protein Complexes Based on Multiple Topological Structures in PPI Networks
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
Various computational algorithms are developed to identify protein complexes based on only one of specific topological structures in protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks, such as cliques, dense subgraphs, core-attachment structures and starlike structures. However, protein complexes exhibit intricate connections in a PPI network. They cannot be fully detected by only single topological structure. In this paper, we propose an algorithm based on multiple topological structures to identify protein complexes from PPI networks. In the proposed algorithm, four single topological structure based algorithms are first employed to identify raw predictions with specific topological structures, respectively. Those raw predictions are trimmed according to their topological information or GO annotations. Similar results are carefully merged before generating final predictions. Numerical experiments are conducted on a yeast PPI network of DIP and a human PPI network of HPRD. The predicted results show that the multiple topological structure based algorithm can not only obtain a more number of predictions, but also generate results with high accuracy in terms of f-score, matching with known protein complexes and functional enrichments with GO.
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