Reciprocal perspective as a super learner improves drug-target interaction prediction (MUSDTI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identification of novel drug-target interactions (DTI) is critical to drug discovery and drug repurposing to address contemporary medical and public health challenges presented by emergent diseases. Historically, computational methods have framed DTI prediction as a binary classification problem (indicating whether or not a drug physically interacts with a given protein target); however, framing the problem instead as a regression-based prediction of the physiochemical binding affinity is more meaningful. With growing databases of experimentally derived drug-target interactions (e.g. Davis, Binding-DB, and Kiba), deep learning-based DTI predictors can be effectively leveraged to achieve state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance. In this work, we formulated a DTI competition as part of the coursework for a senior undergraduate machine learning course and challenged students to generate component DTI models that might surpass SOTA models and effectively combine these component models as part of a meta-model using the Reciprocal Perspective (RP) multi-view learning framework. Following 6 weeks of concerted effort, 28 student-produced component deep-learning DTI models were leveraged in this work to produce a new SOTA RP-DTI model, denoted the Meta Undergraduate Student DTI (MUSDTI) model. Through a series of experiments we demonstrate that (1) RP can considerably improve SOTA DTI prediction, (2) our new double-cold experimental design is more appropriate for emergent DTI challenges, (3) that our novel MUSDTI meta-model outperforms SOTA models, (4) that RP can improve upon individual models as an ensembling method, and finally, (5) RP can be utilized for low computation transfer learning. This work introduces a number of important revelations for the field of DTI prediction and sequence-based, pairwise prediction in general.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".