MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399917261 · doi:10.1002/pro.5076

Structure‐aware deep learning model for peptide toxicity prediction

2024· article· en· W4399917261 on OpenAlexafffund
Hossein Ebrahimikondori, Darcy Sutherland, Anat Yanai, Amelia Richter, Ali Salehi, Chenkai Li, Lauren Coombe, Monica Kotkoff, René L. Warren, İnanç Birol

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Centre for Disease ControlBC Cancer Agency
FundersInvestment Agriculture FoundationGenome British ColumbiaGenome Canada
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceDeep learningToxicityMachine learningArtificial intelligencePeptideGraphAmino acidComputational biologyChemistryBiologyBiochemistryTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antimicrobial resistance is a critical public health concern, necessitating the exploration of alternative treatments. While antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) show promise, assessing their toxicity using traditional wet lab methods is both time-consuming and costly. We introduce tAMPer, a novel multi-modal deep learning model designed to predict peptide toxicity by integrating the underlying amino acid sequence composition and the three-dimensional structure of peptides. tAMPer adopts a graph-based representation for peptides, encoding ColabFold-predicted structures, where nodes represent amino acids and edges represent spatial interactions. Structural features are extracted using graph neural networks, and recurrent neural networks capture sequential dependencies. tAMPer's performance was assessed on a publicly available protein toxicity benchmark and an AMP hemolysis data we generated. On the latter, tAMPer achieves an F1-score of 68.7%, outperforming the second-best method by 23.4%. On the protein benchmark, tAMPer exhibited an improvement of over 3.0% in the F1-score compared to current state-of-the-art methods. We anticipate tAMPer to accelerate AMP discovery and development by reducing the reliance on laborious toxicity screening experiments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtein ScienceSame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207