MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404969095 · doi:10.52711/0974-360x.2024.00663

Bio-inspired Approaches for G-protein coupled receptors identification using Chou’s PseAAC

2024· article· en· W4404969095 on OpenAlexaff
Karima Alem, Meriem Zekri, Labiba Souici‐Meslati

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Journal of Pharmacy and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsCollège Boréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Particle swarm optimizationG protein-coupled receptorComputer scienceMachine learningSwarm behaviourIdentification (biology)Function (biology)Computational biologyBiologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: G–protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are key factors in cell-to-cell communication. GPCR activation is necessary for normal physiology of all organisms while dysfunction of GPCR signalling is responsible for many of the diseases. Consequently, GPCRs have a fundamental role in pharmacological research and are targets for many drugs. Objective: The problem is that many GPCRs remain orphans (have unknown function), they are not classified correctly, and new bioinformatics approaches are needed to address this issue. In our work, we focus on bio-inspired approaches, which are increasingly used in recent years because of their interesting inspirations from biological systems mechanisms and their good performances in many research areas. Methods: In this article, we use categories of bio-inspired well-known methods to identify GPCR function, which are swarm-based approaches and immunological computing. The proposed classifiers based on three popular swarm intelligence approaches are Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) and PSO/ACO hybridization. The classification results are compared with these of the proposed immunological classifier based on the Artificial Immune Recognition System (AIRS), in order to identify the best bio-inspired method for the given problem. Results: The immune classifier (AIRS2) provided better results than swarm-based classifiers, specifically at the first levels (superfamily and families) Conclusion: It is interesting to adapt the bio-inspired algorithms in order to increase predictive accuracy at all GPCR hierarchical levels

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Journal of Pharmacy and TechnologySame topicMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFrench-language works237,207