DiffPaSS—high-performance differentiable pairing of protein sequences using soft scores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Identifying interacting partners from two sets of protein sequences has important applications in computational biology. Interacting partners share similarities across species due to their common evolutionary history, and feature correlations in amino acid usage due to the need to maintain complementary interaction interfaces. Thus, the problem of finding interacting pairs can be formulated as searching for a pairing of sequences that maximizes a sequence similarity or a coevolution score. Several methods have been developed to address this problem, applying different approximate optimization methods to different scores. RESULTS: We introduce Differentiable Pairing using Soft Scores (DiffPaSS), a differentiable framework for flexible, fast, and hyperparameter-free optimization for pairing interacting biological sequences, which can be applied to a wide variety of scores. We apply it to a benchmark prokaryotic dataset, using mutual information and neighbor graph alignment scores. DiffPaSS outperforms existing algorithms for optimizing the same scores. We demonstrate the usefulness of our paired alignments for the prediction of protein complex structure. DiffPaSS does not require sequences to be aligned, and we also apply it to nonaligned sequences from T-cell receptors. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: A PyTorch implementation and installable Python package are available at https://github.com/Bitbol-Lab/DiffPaSS.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".