MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798373489 · doi:10.1186/s12918-018-0573-y

Improved flower pollination algorithm for identifying essential proteins

2018· article· en· W2798373489 on OpenAlexaff
Xiujuan Lei, Ming Fang, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Luonan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Systems Biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPollinationIdentification (biology)Computational biologyComputer scienceSystems biologyBiologyBiological dataInteraction networkGeneAlgorithmMachine learningBioinformaticsGeneticsPollenBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Essential proteins are necessary for the survival and development of cells. The identification of essential proteins can help to understand the minimal requirements for cellular life and it also plays an important role in the disease genes study and drug design. With the development of high-throughput techniques, a large amount of protein-protein interactions data is available to predict essential proteins at the network level. Hitherto, even though a number of essential protein discovery methods have been proposed, the prediction precision still needs to be improved. METHODS: In this paper, we propose a new algorithm, improved Flower Pollination algorithm (FPA) for identifying Essential proteins, named FPE. Different from other existing essential protein discovery methods, we apply FPA which is a new intelligent algorithm imitating pollination behavior of flowering plants in nature to identify essential proteins. Analogous to flower pollination is to find optimal reproduction from the perspective of biological evolution, and the identification of essential proteins is to discover a candidate essential protein set by analyzing the corresponding relationships between FPA algorithm and the prediction of essential proteins, and redefining the positions of flowers and specific pollination process. Moreover, it has been proved that the integration of biological and topological properties can get improved precision for identifying essential proteins. Consequently, we develop a GSC measurement in order to judge the essentiality of proteins, which takes into account not only the Gene expression data, Subcellular localization and protein Complexes information, but also the network topology. RESULTS: The experimental results show that FPE performs better than the state-of-the-art methods (DC, SC, IC, EC, LAC, NC, PeC, WDC, UDoNC and SON) in terms of the prediction precision, precision-recall curve and jackknife curve for identifying essential proteins and also has high stability. CONCLUSIONS: We confirm that FPE can be used to effectively identify essential proteins by the use of nature-inspired algorithm FPA and the combination of network topology with gene expression data, subcellular localization and protein complexes information. The experimental results have shown the superiority of FPE for the prediction of essential proteins.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Systems BiologySame topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207