MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911960890 · doi:10.1109/bibm.2018.8621551

A Deep Learning Framework for Identifying Essential Proteins Based on Protein-Protein Interaction Network and Gene Expression Data

2018· article· en· W2911960890 on OpenAlexaff
Min Zeng, Min Li, Zhihui Fei, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Yaohang Li, Yi Pan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceAdaBoostSupport vector machineRandom forestIdentification (biology)Decision treeNetwork topologyDeep learningFeature selectionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying essential proteins is of vital importance for disease study and drug design. A lot of topology-based and machine learning-based methods have been proposed to identify essential proteins. However, traditional topology-based methods only focus on explicitly described characteristics of network topology and are not expressive enough to capture the complexity of connectivity patterns observed in biological networks. In addition, identification of essential proteins is an imbalanced learning problem due to the fact that there are significantly more non-essential proteins than the essential ones. Few machine learning-based methods take the imbalanced nature into consideration. We propose a new deep learning framework, to tackle the above limitations. In our model, we make use of the node2vec technique to learn topological features from protein-protein interaction (PPI) network without manual feature selection. To overcome the problem of the imbalanced nature of dataset, we use a sampling method, which does not bias to the majority and minority classes in a training step and tend to make full use of all samples during the whole training process. To evaluate the performance of our model, we test it on S. cerevisiae dataset. Our results show that it greatly outperforms topology-based methods including DC, BC, CC, EC, NC, LAC, PeC and WDC. It also outperforms machine learning-based methods including support vector machine (SVM), decision tree, random forest and Adaboost.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207