MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246311611 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0141603

Computational Identification of MoRFs in Protein Sequences Using Hierarchical Application of Bayes Rule

2015· article· en· W2246311611 on OpenAlexafffund
Nawar Malhis, Eric T. C. Wong, Roy Nassar, Jörg Gsponer

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome British ColumbiaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsBayes' theoremComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Protein sequencingComputational biologySequence (biology)Sequence alignmentNaive Bayes classifierArtificial intelligenceData miningBioinformaticsPeptide sequenceBiologyBayesian probabilityGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Intrinsically disordered regions of proteins play an essential role in the regulation of various biological processes. Key to their regulatory function is often the binding to globular protein domains via sequence elements known as molecular recognition features (MoRFs). Development of computational tools for the identification of candidate MoRF locations in amino acid sequences is an important task and an area of growing interest. Given the relative sparseness of MoRFs in protein sequences, the accuracy of the available MoRF predictors is often inadequate for practical usage, which leaves a significant need and room for improvement. In this work, we introduce MoRFCHiBi_Web, which predicts MoRF locations in protein sequences with higher accuracy compared to current MoRF predictors. METHODS: Three distinct and largely independent property scores are computed with component predictors and then combined to generate the final MoRF propensity scores. The first score reflects the likelihood of sequence windows to harbour MoRFs and is based on amino acid composition and sequence similarity information. It is generated by MoRFCHiBi using small windows of up to 40 residues in size. The second score identifies long stretches of protein disorder and is generated by ESpritz with the DisProt option. Lastly, the third score reflects residue conservation and is assembled from PSSM files generated by PSI-BLAST. These propensity scores are processed and then hierarchically combined using Bayes rule to generate the final MoRFCHiBi_Web predictions. RESULTS: MoRFCHiBi_Web was tested on three datasets. Results show that MoRFCHiBi_Web outperforms previously developed predictors by generating less than half the false positive rate for the same true positive rate at practical threshold values. This level of accuracy paired with its relatively high processing speed makes MoRFCHiBi_Web a practical tool for MoRF prediction. AVAILABILITY: http://morf.chibi.ubc.ca:8080/morf/.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207