DEEPCON: protein contact prediction using dilated convolutional neural networks with dropout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Exciting new opportunities have arisen to solve the protein contact prediction problem from the progress in neural networks and the availability of a large number of homologous sequences through high-throughput sequencing. In this work, we study how deep convolutional neural networks (ConvNets) may be best designed and developed to solve this long-standing problem. RESULTS: With publicly available datasets, we designed and trained various ConvNet architectures. We tested several recent deep learning techniques including wide residual networks, dropouts and dilated convolutions. We studied the improvements in the precision of medium-range and long-range contacts, and compared the performance of our best architectures with the ones used in existing state-of-the-art methods. The proposed ConvNet architectures predict contacts with significantly more precision than the architectures used in several state-of-the-art methods. When trained using the DeepCov dataset consisting of 3456 proteins and tested on PSICOV dataset of 150 proteins, our architectures achieve up to 15% higher precision when L/2 long-range contacts are evaluated. Similarly, when trained using the DNCON2 dataset consisting of 1426 proteins and tested on 84 protein domains in the CASP12 dataset, our single network achieves 4.8% higher precision than the ensembled DNCON2 method when top L long-range contacts are evaluated. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: DEEPCON is available at https://github.com/badriadhikari/DEEPCON/.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".