Prediction of protein folding rates from primary sequences using hybrid sequence representation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to predict protein folding rates constitutes an important step in understanding the overall folding mechanisms. Although many of the prediction methods are structure based, successful predictions can also be obtained from the sequence. We developed a novel method called prediction of protein folding rates (PPFR), for the prediction of protein folding rates from protein sequences. PPFR implements a linear regression model for each of the mainstream folding dynamics including two-, multi-, and mixed-state proteins. The proposed method provides predictions characterized by strong correlations with the experimental folding rates, which equal 0.87 for the two- and multistate proteins and 0.82 for the mixed-state proteins, when evaluated with out-of-sample jackknife test. Based on in-sample and out-of-sample tests, the PPFR's predictions are shown to be better than most of other sequence only and structure-based predictors and complementary to the predictions of the most recent sequence-based QRSM method. We show that simultaneous incorporation of several characteristics, including the sequence, physiochemical properties of residues, and predicted secondary structure provides improved quality. This hybridized prediction model was analyzed to reveal the complementary factors that can be used in tandem to predict folding rates. We show that bigger proteins require more time for folding, higher helical and coil content and the presence of Phe, Asn, and Gln may accelerate the folding process, the inclusion of Ile, Val, Thr, and Ser may slow down the folding process, and for the two-state proteins increased beta-strand content may decelerate the folding process. Finally, PPFR provides strong correlation when predicting sequences with low similarity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".