Structure-Based Protein Function Prediction using Graph Convolutional Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The large number of available sequences and the diversity of protein functions challenge current experimental and computational approaches to determining and predicting protein function. We present a deep learning Graph Convolutional Network (GCN) for predicting protein functions and concurrently identifying functionally important residues. This model is initially trained using experimentally determined structures from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) but has significant de-noising capability, with only a minor drop in performance observed when structure predictions are used. We take advantage of this denoising property to train the model on > 200,000 protein structures, including many homology-predicted structures, greatly expanding the reach and applications of the method. Our model learns general structure-function relationships by robustly predicting functions of proteins with ≤ 40% sequence identity to the training set. We show that our GCN architecture predicts functions more accurately than Convolutional Neural Networks trained on sequence data alone and previous competing methods. Using class activation mapping, we automatically identify structural regions at the residue-level that lead to each function prediction for every confidently predicted protein, advancing site-specific function prediction. We use our method to annotate PDB and SWISS-MODEL proteins, making several new confident function predictions spanning both fold and function classifications.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".