Calibrating the classifier for protein family prediction with protein sequence using machine learning techniques: An empirical investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A gene is a basic unit of congenital traits and a sequence of nucleotides in deoxyribonucleic acid that encrypts protein synthesis. Proteins are made up of amino acid residue and are classified for use in protein-related research, which includes identifying changes in genes, finding associations with diseases and phenotypes, and identifying potential drug targets. To this end, proteins are studied and classified, based on the family. For family prediction, however, a computational rather than an experimental approach is introduced, owing to the time involved in the latter process. Computational approaches to protein family prediction involve two important processes, feature selection and classification. Existing approaches to protein family prediction are alignment-based and alignment-free. The drawback of the former is that it searches for protein signatures by aligning every available sequence. Consequently, the latter alignment-free approach is taken for study, given that it only needs sequence-based features to predict the protein family and is far more efficient than the former. Nevertheless, the sequence-based characteristics taken for study have additional features to offer. There is, thus, a need to select the best features of all. When comes to classification still there is no perfection in classifying the protein. So, a comparison of different approaches is done to find the best feature selection technique and classification technique for protein family prediction. From the study, the feature subset selected provides the best classification accuracy of 96% for filter-based feature selection technique and the random forest classifier.
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 | 0.008 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".