GlyNet: a multi-task neural network for predicting protein–glycan interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, transfusion, and organ transplantation build on a fundamental understanding of glycan-protein interactions. To aid this, we developed GlyNet, a model that accurately predicts interactions (relative binding strengths) between mammalian glycans and 352 glycan-binding proteins, many at multiple concentrations. For each glycan input, our model produces 1257 outputs, each representing the relative interaction strength between the input glycan and a particular protein sample. GlyNet learns these continuous values using relative fluorescence units (RFUs) measured on 599 glycans in the Consortium for Functional Glycomics glycan arrays and extrapolates these to RFUs from additional, untested glycans. GlyNet's output of continuous values provides more detailed results than the standard binary classification models. After incorporating a simple threshold to transform such continuous outputs the resulting GlyNet classifier outperforms those standard classifiers. GlyNet is the first multi-output regression model for predicting protein-glycan interactions and serves as an important benchmark, facilitating development of quantitative computational glycobiology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".