MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408461854 · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.4c02309

Join Persistent Homology (JPH)-Based Machine Learning for Metalloprotein–Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction

2025· article· en· W4408461854 on OpenAlexaff
Yaxing Wang, Xiang Liu, Yipeng Zhang, Xiangjun Wang, Kelin Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMinistry of Education - Singapore
KeywordsMetalloproteinJoin (topology)Homology (biology)Computer scienceComputational biologyLigand (biochemistry)Signal transducing adaptor proteinChemistryArtificial intelligenceBiologyBiochemistryReceptorGeneMathematicsEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the crucial role of metalloproteins in respiration, oxidative stress protection, photosynthesis, and drug metabolism, the design and discovery of drugs that can target metalloproteins are extremely important. Recently, enormous potential has been shown by topological data analysis (TDA) and TDA-based machine learning models in various steps of drug design and discovery. Here, we propose, for the first time, join persistent homology (JPH) and JPH-based machine learning models for metalloprotein-ligand binding affinity prediction. Mathematically, dramatically different from persistent homology and extended persistent homology, our JPH employs a set of filtration functions to generate a multistage filtration for the join of the original simplicial complex and a specially designed test simplicial complex. From the featurization perspective, our JPH-based molecular descriptors can provide a more comprehensive characterization of the intrinsic topological information of the data. Our JPH descriptors are combined with the gradient boosting tree (GBT) model for metalloprotein-ligand binding affinity prediction. The benchmark dataset for metalloprotein-ligand complexes from PDBbind-v2020 is employed for the validation and comparison of our model. It has been found that our JPH-GBT model can outperform all of the existing models, as far as we know. This demonstrates the great potential of our join persistent homology in the characterization of molecular structures and functions.

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 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 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 score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Information and ModelingSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207