GNN-SubNet: disease subnetwork detection with explainable graph neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: The tremendous success of graphical neural networks (GNNs) already had a major impact on systems biology research. For example, GNNs are currently being used for drug target recognition in protein-drug interaction networks, as well as for cancer gene discovery and more. Important aspects whose practical relevance is often underestimated are comprehensibility, interpretability and explainability. RESULTS: In this work, we present a novel graph-based deep learning framework for disease subnetwork detection via explainable GNNs. Each patient is represented by the topology of a protein-protein interaction (PPI) network, and the nodes are enriched with multi-omics features from gene expression and DNA methylation. In addition, we propose a modification of the GNNexplainer that provides model-wide explanations for improved disease subnetwork detection. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The proposed methods and tools are implemented in the GNN-SubNet Python package, which we have made available on our GitHub for the international research community (https://github.com/pievos101/GNN-SubNet). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".