NTD-DR: Nonnegative tensor decomposition for drug repositioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computational drug repositioning aims to identify potential applications of existing drugs for the treatment of diseases for which they were not designed. This approach can considerably accelerate the traditional drug discovery process by decreasing the required time and costs of drug development. Tensor decomposition enables us to integrate multiple drug- and disease-related data to boost the performance of prediction. In this study, a nonnegative tensor decomposition for drug repositioning, NTD-DR, is proposed. In order to capture the hidden information in drug-target, drug-disease, and target-disease networks, NTD-DR uses these pairwise associations to construct a three-dimensional tensor representing drug-target-disease triplet associations and integrates them with similarity information of drugs, targets, and disease to make a prediction. We compare NTD-DR with recent state-of-the-art methods in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and the area under the precision and recall curve (AUPR) and find that our method outperforms competing methods. Moreover, case studies with five diseases also confirm the reliability of predictions made by NTD-DR. Our proposed method identifies more known associations among the top 50 predictions than other methods. In addition, novel associations identified by NTD-DR are validated by literature analyses.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".