De novo peptide sequencing by deep learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De novo peptide sequencing from tandem MS data is the key technology in proteomics for the characterization of proteins, especially for new sequences, such as mAbs. In this study, we propose a deep neural network model, DeepNovo, for de novo peptide sequencing. DeepNovo architecture combines recent advances in convolutional neural networks and recurrent neural networks to learn features of tandem mass spectra, fragment ions, and sequence patterns of peptides. The networks are further integrated with local dynamic programming to solve the complex optimization task of de novo sequencing. We evaluated the method on a wide variety of species and found that DeepNovo considerably outperformed state of the art methods, achieving 7.7-22.9% higher accuracy at the amino acid level and 38.1-64.0% higher accuracy at the peptide level. We further used DeepNovo to automatically reconstruct the complete sequences of antibody light and heavy chains of mouse, achieving 97.5-100% coverage and 97.2-99.5% accuracy, without assisting databases. Moreover, DeepNovo is retrainable to adapt to any sources of data and provides a complete end-to-end training and prediction solution to the de novo sequencing problem. Not only does our study extend the deep learning revolution to a new field, but it also shows an innovative approach in solving optimization problems by using deep learning and dynamic programming.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".