Computer vision-based automated peak picking applied to protein NMR spectra
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: A detailed analysis of multidimensional NMR spectra of macromolecules requires the identification of individual resonances (peaks). This task can be tedious and time-consuming and often requires support by experienced users. Automated peak picking algorithms were introduced more than 25 years ago, but there are still major deficiencies/flaws that often prevent complete and error free peak picking of biological macromolecule spectra. The major challenges of automated peak picking algorithms is both the distinction of artifacts from real peaks particularly from those with irregular shapes and also picking peaks in spectral regions with overlapping resonances which are very hard to resolve by existing computer algorithms. In both of these cases a visual inspection approach could be more effective than a 'blind' algorithm. RESULTS: We present a novel approach using computer vision (CV) methodology which could be better adapted to the problem of peak recognition. After suitable 'training' we successfully applied the CV algorithm to spectra of medium-sized soluble proteins up to molecular weights of 26 kDa and to a 130 kDa complex of a tetrameric membrane protein in detergent micelles. Our CV approach outperforms commonly used programs. With suitable training datasets the application of the presented method can be extended to automated peak picking in multidimensional spectra of nucleic acids or carbohydrates and adapted to solid-state NMR spectra. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: CV-Peak Picker is available upon request from the authors. CONTACT: gsw@mol.biol.ethz.ch; michal.walczak@mol.biol.ethz.ch; adam.gonczarek@pwr.edu.pl SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".