MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200900308 · doi:10.3390/ph14100948

Deep Modeling of Regulating Effects of Small Molecules on Longevity-Associated Genes

2021· article· en· W3200900308 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiaying You, Michael Hsing, Artem Cherkasov

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceuticals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLongevityComputational biologyBiologyGeneMedicineBioinformaticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceuticalsSame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207