Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protein-protein interactions (PPIs) are key drivers of cell function and evolution. While it is widely assumed that most permanent PPIs are important for cellular function, it remains unclear whether transient PPIs are equally important. Here, we estimate and compare dispensable content among transient PPIs and permanent PPIs in human. Starting with a human reference interactome mapped by experiments, we construct a human structural interactome by building three-dimensional structural models for PPIs, and then distinguish transient PPIs from permanent PPIs using several structural and biophysical properties. We map common mutations from healthy individuals and disease-causing mutations onto the structural interactome, and perform structure-based calculations of the probabilities for common mutations (assumed to be neutral) and disease mutations (assumed to be mildly deleterious) to disrupt transient PPIs and permanent PPIs. Using Bayes' theorem we estimate that a similarly small fraction (<~20%) of both transient and permanent PPIs are completely dispensable, i.e., effectively neutral upon disruption. Hence, transient and permanent interactions are subject to similarly strong selective constraints in the human interactome.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".