MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998018748 · doi:10.1186/s12859-019-3278-3

IILLS: predicting virus-receptor interactions based on similarity and semi-supervised learning

2019· article· en· W2998018748 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Bioinformatics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersHigher Education Discipline Innovation ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSimilarity (geometry)Computational biologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceCross-validationVirusPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningBiologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Viral infectious diseases are the serious threat for human health. The receptor-binding is the first step for the viral infection of hosts. To more effectively treat human viral infectious diseases, the hidden virus-receptor interactions must be discovered. However, current computational methods for predicting virus-receptor interactions are limited. RESULT: In this study, we propose a new computational method (IILLS) to predict virus-receptor interactions based on Initial Interaction scores method via the neighbors and the Laplacian regularized Least Square algorithm. IILLS integrates the known virus-receptor interactions and amino acid sequences of receptors. The similarity of viruses is calculated by the Gaussian Interaction Profile (GIP) kernel. On the other hand, we also compute the receptor GIP similarity and the receptor sequence similarity. Then the sequence similarity is used as the final similarity of receptors according to the prediction results. The 10-fold cross validation (10CV) and leave one out cross validation (LOOCV) are used to assess the prediction performance of our method. We also compare our method with other three competing methods (BRWH, LapRLS, CMF). CONLUSION: The experiment results show that IILLS achieves the AUC values of 0.8675 and 0.9061 with the 10-fold cross validation and leave-one-out cross validation (LOOCV), respectively, which illustrates that IILLS is superior to the competing methods. In addition, the case studies also further indicate that the IILLS method is effective for the virus-receptor interaction prediction.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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