SAMP: Identifying Antimicrobial Peptides by an Ensemble Learning Model Based on Proportionalized Split Amino Acid Composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is projected that 10 million deaths could be attributed to drug-resistant bacteria infections in 2050. To address this concern, identifying new-generation antibiotics is an effective way. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), a class of innate immune effectors, have received significant attention for their capacity to eliminate drug-resistant pathogens, including viruses, bacteria, and fungi. Recent years have witnessed widespread applications of computational methods especially machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) for discovering AMPs. However, existing methods only use features including compositional, physiochemical, and structural properties of peptides, which cannot fully capture sequence information from AMPs. Here, we present SAMP, an ensemble random projection (RP) based computational model that leverages a new type of features called Proportionalized Split Amino Acid Composition (PSAAC) in addition to conventional sequence-based features for AMP prediction. With this new feature set, SAMP captures the residue patterns like sorting signals at around both the N-terminus and the C-terminus, while also retaining the sequence order information from the middle peptide fragments. Benchmarking tests on different balanced and imbalanced datasets demonstrate that SAMP consistently outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods, such as iAMPpred and AMPScanner V2, in terms of accuracy, MCC, G-measure and F1-score. In addition, by leveraging an ensemble RP architecture, SAMP is scalable to processing large-scale AMP identification with further performance improvement, compared to those models without RP. To facilitate the use of SAMP, we have developed a Python package freely available at https://github.com/wan-mlab/SAMP.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".