Identification of Novel Antibacterial Peptides by Chemoinformatics and Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise of antibiotic resistant pathogens is one of the most pressing global health issues. Discovery of new classes of antibiotics has not kept pace; new agents often suffer from cross-resistance to existing agents of similar structure. Short, cationic peptides with antimicrobial activity are essential to the host defenses of many organisms and represent a promising new class of antimicrobials. This paper reports the successful in silico screening for potent antibiotic peptides using a combination of QSAR and machine learning techniques. On the basis of initial high-throughput measurements of activity of over 1400 random peptides, artificial neural network models were built using QSAR descriptors and subsequently used to screen an in silico library of approximately 100,000 peptides. In vitro validation of the modeling showed 94% accuracy in identifying highly active peptides. The best peptides identified through screening were found to have activities comparable or superior to those of four conventional antibiotics and superior to the peptide most advanced in clinical development against a broad array of multiresistant human pathogens.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".