MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402821735 · doi:10.1101/2024.09.23.614603

Protein Language Models: Is Scaling Necessary?

2024· preprint· en· W4402821735 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchPolytechnique MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalingComputer scienceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public protein sequence databases contain samples from the fitness landscape explored by nature. Protein language models (pLMs) pre-trained on these sequences aim to capture this landscape for tasks like property prediction and protein design. Following the same trend as in natural language processing, pLMs have continuously been scaled up. However, the premise that scale leads to better performance assumes that source databases provide an accurate representation of the underlying fitness landscape, which is likely false. By developing an efficient codebase, designing a modern architecture, and addressing data quality concerns such as sample bias, we introduce AMPLIFY, a best-in-class pLM that is orders of magnitude less expensive to train and deploy than previous models. Furthermore, to support the scientific community and democratize the training of pLMs, we have open-sourced AMPLIFY’s pre-training codebase, data, and model checkpoints.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.211 · 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