Identification of Essential Proteins Based on Improved HITS Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Essential proteins are critical to the development and survival of cells. Identifying and analyzing essential proteins is vital to understand the molecular mechanisms of living cells and design new drugs. With the development of high-throughput technologies, many protein–protein interaction (PPI) data are available, which facilitates the studies of essential proteins at the network level. Up to now, although various computational methods have been proposed, the prediction precision still needs to be improved. In this paper, we propose a novel method by applying Hyperlink-Induced Topic Search (HITS) on weighted PPI networks to detect essential proteins, named HSEP. First, an original undirected PPI network is transformed into a bidirectional PPI network. Then, both biological information and network topological characteristics are taken into account to weighted PPI networks. Pieces of biological information include gene expression data, Gene Ontology (GO) annotation and subcellular localization. The edge clustering coefficient is represented as network topological characteristics to measure the closeness of two connected nodes. We conducted experiments on two species, namely Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Drosophila melanogaster, and the experimental results show that HSEP outperformed some state-of-the-art essential proteins detection techniques.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".