A naive Bayes model to predict coupling between seventransmembrane domain receptors and G-proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: An understanding of the coupling between a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) and a specific class of heterotrimeric GTP-binding proteins (G-proteins) is vital for further comprehending the function of the receptor within a cell. However, predicting G-protein coupling based on the amino acid sequence of a receptor has been a daunting task. While experimental data for G-protein coupling exist, published models that rely on sequence based prediction are few. In this study, we have developed a Naive Bayes model to successfully predict G-protein coupling specificity by training over 80 GPCRs with known coupling. Each intracellular domain of GPCRs was treated as a discrete random variable, conditionally independent of one another. In order to determine the conditional probability distributions of these variables, ClustalW-generated phylogenetic trees were used as an approximation for the clustering of the intracellular domain sequences. The sampling of an intracellular domain sequence was achieved by identifying the cluster containing the homologue with the highest sequence similarity. RESULTS: Out of 55 GPCRs validated, the model yielded a correct classification rate of 72%. Our model also predicted multiple G-protein coupling for most of the GPCRs in the validation set. The Bayesian approach in this work offers an alternative to the experimental approach in order to answer the biological problem of GPCR/G-protein coupling selectivity. AVAILABILITY: Academic users should send their request for the perl program for calculating likelihood probabilities at jack.cao@astrazeneca.com. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The materials can be viewed at http://www.astrazeneca-montreal.com/AZRDM_info/supporting_info.pdf.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".