Lightway access to AlphaMissense data that demonstrates a balanced performance of this missense mutation predictor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Single amino acid substitutions can profoundly affect protein folding, dynamics, and function, leading to potential pathological consequences. The ability to discern between benign and pathogenic substitutions is pivotal for therapeutic interventions and research directions. Given the limitations in experimental examination of these variants, AlphaMissense has emerged as a promising predictor of the pathogenicity of single nucleotide polymorphism variants. In our study, we assessed the efficacy of AlphaMissense across several protein groups, such as mitochondrial, housekeeping, transmembrane proteins, and specific proteins like CFTR, using ClinVar data for validation. Our comprehensive evaluation showed that AlphaMissense delivers outstanding performance, with MCC scores predominantly between 0.6 and 0.74. We observed low performance on the CFTR and disordered, membrane-interacting MemMoRF datasets. However, an enhanced performance with CFTR was shown when benchmarked against the CFTR2 database. Our results also emphasize that quality of AlphaFold’s predictions can seriously influence AlphaMissense predictions. Most importantly, AlphaMissense’s consistent capability in predicting pathogenicity across diverse protein groups, spanning both transmembrane and soluble domains was found. Moreover, the prediction of likely-pathogenic labels for IBS and CFTR coupling helix residues emphasizes AlphaMissense’s potential as a tool for pinpointing functionally significant sites. Additionally, to make AlphaMissense predictions more accessible, we have introduced a user-friendly web resource ( https://alphamissense.hegelab.org ) to enhance the utility of this valuable tool. Our insights into AlphaMissense’s capability, along with this online resource, underscore its potential to significantly aid both research and clinical 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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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".