MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233935614 · doi:10.1101/462812

PSL-Recommender: Protein Subcellular Localization Prediction using Recommender System

2018· preprint· en· W4233935614 on OpenAlexaff
Ruhollah Jamali, Changiz Eslahchi, Soheil Jahangiri

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecommender systemPSLComputer scienceMatrix decompositionMachine learningSubcellular localizationArtificial intelligenceInformation retrievalMathematicsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Identifying a protein’s subcellular location is of great interest for understanding its function and behavior within the cell. In the last decade, many computational approaches have been proposed as a surrogate for expensive and inefficient wet-lab methods that are used for protein subcellular localization. Yet, there is still much room for improving the prediction accuracy of these methods. PSL-Recommender (Protein subcellular location recommender) is a method that employs neighborhood regularized logistic matrix factorization to build a recommender system for protein subcellular localization. The effectiveness of PSL-Recommender method is benchmarked on one human and three animals datasets. The results indicate that the PSL-Recommender significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods, improving the previous best method up to 31% in F1 – mean, up to 28% in ACC, and up to 47% in AVG. The source of datasets and codes are available at: https://github.com/RJamali/PSL-Recommender

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.009

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 head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207