MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205082786 · doi:10.1093/bib/bbab421

MDF-SA-DDI: predicting drug–drug interaction events based on multi-source drug fusion, multi-source feature fusion and transformer self-attention mechanism

2021· article· en· W3205082786 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

VenueBriefings in Bioinformatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature learningDrugFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceEncoderFusionTransformerMechanism (biology)Fusion mechanismPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningMedicinePharmacologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the main problems with the joint use of multiple drugs is that it may cause adverse drug interactions and side effects that damage the body. Therefore, it is important to predict potential drug interactions. However, most of the available prediction methods can only predict whether two drugs interact or not, whereas few methods can predict interaction events between two drugs. Accurately predicting interaction events of two drugs is more useful for researchers to study the mechanism of the interaction of two drugs. In the present study, we propose a novel method, MDF-SA-DDI, which predicts drug-drug interaction (DDI) events based on multi-source drug fusion, multi-source feature fusion and transformer self-attention mechanism. MDF-SA-DDI is mainly composed of two parts: multi-source drug fusion and multi-source feature fusion. First, we combine two drugs in four different ways and input the combined drug feature representation into four different drug fusion networks (Siamese network, convolutional neural network and two auto-encoders) to obtain the latent feature vectors of the drug pairs, in which the two auto-encoders have the same structure, and their main difference is the number of neurons in the input layer of the two auto-encoders. Then, we use transformer blocks that include self-attention mechanism to perform latent feature fusion. We conducted experiments on three different tasks with two datasets. On the small dataset, the area under the precision-recall-curve (AUPR) and F1 scores of our method on task 1 reached 0.9737 and 0.8878, respectively, which were better than the state-of-the-art method. On the large dataset, the AUPR and F1 scores of our method on task 1 reached 0.9773 and 0.9117, respectively. In task 2 and task 3 of two datasets, our method also achieved the same or better performance as the state-of-the-art method. More importantly, the case studies on five DDI events are conducted and achieved satisfactory performance. The source codes and data are available at https://github.com/ShenggengLin/MDF-SA-DDI.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.252 · 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