Deep Modeling of Regulating Effects of Small Molecules on Longevity-Associated Genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging is considered an inevitable process that causes deleterious effects in the functioning and appearance of cells, tissues, and organs. Recent emergence of large-scale gene expression datasets and significant advances in machine learning techniques have enabled drug repurposing efforts in promoting longevity. In this work, we further developed our previous approach-DeepCOP, a quantitative chemogenomic model that predicts gene regulating effects, and extended its application across multiple cell lines presented in LINCS to predict aging gene regulating effects induced by small molecules. As a result, a quantitative chemogenomic Deep Model was trained using gene ontology labels, molecular fingerprints, and cell line descriptors to predict gene expression responses to chemical perturbations. Other state-of-the-art machine learning approaches were also evaluated as benchmarks. Among those, the deep neural network (DNN) classifier has top-ranked known drugs with beneficial effects on aging genes, and some of these drugs were previously shown to promote longevity, illustrating the potential utility of this methodology. These results further demonstrate the capability of "hybrid" chemogenomic models, incorporating quantitative descriptors from biomarkers to capture cell specific drug-gene interactions. Such models can therefore be used for discovering drugs with desired gene regulatory effects associated with longevity.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".