A novel method for drug-target interaction prediction based on graph transformers model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug-target interactions (DTIs) prediction becomes more and more important for accelerating drug research and drug repositioning. Drug-target interaction network is a typical model for DTIs prediction. As many different types of relationships exist between drug and target, drug-target interaction network can be used for modeling drug-target interaction relationship. Recent works on drug-target interaction network are mostly concentrate on drug node or target node and neglecting the relationships between drug-target. RESULTS: We propose a novel prediction method for modeling the relationship between drug and target independently. Firstly, we use different level relationships of drugs and targets to construct feature of drug-target interaction. Then, we use line graph to model drug-target interaction. After that, we introduce graph transformer network to predict drug-target interaction. CONCLUSIONS: This method introduces a line graph to model the relationship between drug and target. After transforming drug-target interactions from links to nodes, a graph transformer network is used to accomplish the task of predicting drug-target interactions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".