Enzyme Activity Prediction of Sequence Variants on Novel Substrates using Improved Substrate Encodings and Convolutional Pooling.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protein engineering is currently being revolutionized by deep learning applications, especially through natural language processing (NLP) techniques. It has been shown that state-of-the-art self-supervised language models trained on entire protein databases capture hidden contextual and structural information in amino acid sequences and are capable of improving sequence-to-function predictions. Yet, recent studies have reported that current compound-protein modeling approaches perform poorly on learning interactions between enzymes and substrates of interest within one protein family. We attribute this to low-grade substrate encoding methods and over-compressed sequence representations received by downstream predictive models. In this study, we propose a new substrate-encoding based on Extended Connectivity Fingerprints (ECFPs) and a convolutional-pooling of the sequence embeddings. Through testing on an activity profiling dataset of haloalkanoate dehalogenase superfamily that measures activities of 218 phosphatases against 168 substrates, we show substantial improvements in predictive performances of compound-protein interaction modeling. In addition, we also test the workflow on three other datasets from the halogenase, kinase and aminotransferase families and show that our pipeline achieves good performance on these datasets as well. We further demonstrate the utility of this downstream model architecture by showing that it achieves good performance with six different protein embeddings, including ESM-1b (Rives et al., 2021), TAPE (Rao et al., 2019), ProtBert, ProtAlbert, ProtT5, and ProtXLNet (Elnaggar et al., 2021). This study provides a new workflow for activity prediction on novel substrates that can be used to engineer new enzymes for sustainability applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".