MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379518401 · doi:10.21428/594757db.033df5af

An Explainable Deep Few-shot Network for Protein Family Classification

2023· article· en· W4379518401 on OpenAlexafffund
Saeedeh Jamali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNational Research Council CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsShot (pellet)Artificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protein sequence analysis is arguably a challenging bioinformatics problem covering various areas and applications such as sequence annotation, metagenomics, and comparative genomics.Recent proteomics studies report the superior results of machine learning techniques in comparison to conventional alignment-based and alignment-free methods for analyzing protein sequences.However, the machine learning techniques are dependent on handcrafted features, often extracted from large-scale data sets, that may require domain knowledge in addition to analytics expertise.In this study, by leveraging a deep language model, designed for proteins, and transfer learning, we propose an explainable high-performing deep few-shot Siamese network for the protein family classification task.To the best of our knowledge, this is the first explainable deep network tailored for primary sequence family classification that can highly perform with a very limited number of observations.We are now running intensive experiments, both quantitatively and clinically, to validate the proposed network.We plan to release the network and findings publicly once the validation process is terminated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207