Fold Recognition by Predicted Alignment Accuracy
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
One of the key components in protein structure prediction by protein threading technique is to choose the best overall template for a given target sequence after all the optimal sequence-template alignments are generated. The chosen template should have the best alignment with the target sequence since the three-dimensional structure of the target sequence is built on the sequence-template alignment. The traditional method for template selection is called Z-score, which uses a statistical test to rank all the sequence-template alignments and then chooses the first-ranked template for the sequence. However, the calculation of Z-score is time-consuming and not suitable for genome-scale structure prediction. Z-scores are also hard to interpret when the threading scoring function is the weighted sum of several energy items of different physical meanings. This paper presents a Support Vector Machine (SVM) regression approach to directly predict the alignment accuracy of a sequence-template alignment, which is used to rank all the templates for a specific target sequence. Experimental results on a large-scale benchmark demonstrate that SVM regression performs much better than the composition-corrected Z-score method. SVM regression also runs much faster than the Z-score method.
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