PP<i>i</i>Clust: EFFICIENT CLUSTERING OF 3D PROTEIN–PROTEIN INTERACTION INTERFACES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biological mechanisms through which proteins interact with one another are best revealed by studying the structural interfaces between interacting proteins. Protein-protein interfaces can be extracted from three-dimensional (3D) structural data of protein complexes and then clustered to derive biological insights. However, conventional protein interface clustering methods lack computational scalability and statistical support. In this work, we present a new method named "PPiClust" to systematically encode, cluster, and analyze similar 3D interface patterns in protein complexes efficiently. Experimental results showed that our method is effective in discovering visually consistent and statistically significant clusters of interfaces, and at the same time sufficiently time-efficient to be performed on a single computer. The interface clusters are also useful for uncovering the structural basis of protein interactions. Analysis of the resulting interface clusters revealed groups of structurally diverse proteins having similar interface patterns. We also found, in some of the interface clusters, the presence of well-known linear binding motifs which were noncontiguous in the primary sequences. These results suggest that PPiClust can discover not only statistically significant, but also biologically significant, protein interface clusters from protein complex structural data.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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".