DeepQSP: Identification of Quorum Sensing Peptides Through Neural Network Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quorum Sensing Peptides (QSP) are small molecules crucial for microbial communication, enabling bacterial populations to coordinate behaviors such as biofilm formation and virulence. The identification of QSP is vital for understanding these biological processes. While existing clinical and lab-based methods are available, they can be costly and time-consuming. This study introduces DeepQSP, a novel technique for QSP identification, which combines Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA), a word embedding feature extraction method, with classical amino acid-based extraction Pseudo Amino Acid Composition (PAAC), and a convolutional neural network (CNN) classifier. The DeepQSP model was evaluated using a dataset of 440 peptide sequences, achieving impressive performance metrics: 0.9697 accuracy, 0.9655 sensitivity, 0.9730 specificity, and a Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) of 0.9385. The LSA combined with PAAC improves peptide sequence representation, while the CNN effectively captures complex patterns, leading to accurate QSP identification. These quantified results demonstrate the effectiveness of the DeepQSP method, offering a powerful tool for advancing the study of microbial interaction and quorum sensing. The enhanced identification of QSPs is critical for microbiology and bioengineering, aiding in the understanding of cell-to-cell communication in microorganisms. • This study introduces a novel technique for Quorum sensing Peptides (QSP) identification. • LSA, a word embedding feature extraction method and a CNN method were applied for QSP. • Proposed model achieves remarkable performance metrics. • The enhanced performance: 0.9697 accuracy, 0.9655 sensitivity, 0.9730 specificity, and 0.9385 MCC. • The LSA+PAAC_CNN model performs better than the other applied models used in the study.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".