Patterny: A Troupe of Decipherment Helpers for Intrinsic Disorder, Low Complexity and Compositional Bias in Proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) are sometimes considered parts of the ‘dark proteomes’, i.e., protein parts that have been largely under-appreciated, as are the overlapping phenomena of low-complexity or compositionally biased regions (LCRs/CBRs). Experimentalists and computationalists alike are still learning how to decrypt the functionally meaningful features of such regions. Here, I report the creation of the support troupe Patterny to aid such protein cryptanalysis. The current troupe members are named Blocky, Bandy, Moduley, Repeaty, and Runny. To discern important features, protein regions are compared to ideal assortments wherein everything is sampled proportionally and dispersed randomly. Blocky discerns the segregation of amino-acids by type, and scores them for it. Bandy is focused on picking out compositional bands and calculating their evenness. Moduley labels the boundaries of optimized compositional modules (‘CModules’) and other possible boundary sets for compositionally biased regions. Repeaty concisely summarizes repetitiveness using an information entropy of amino-acid interval diversity. Runny enumerates homopeptide content and assesses its significance. Both original whole sequences and CModules from Moduley, are fed into the other Patterny members. Patterny is applied to some illustrative sample data from yeast proteome and the DISPROT database. It is available at Github, and might aid those aiming to intensify light-shedding and hypothesis generation for protein regions with function encoded in a distributed manner, such as IDRs and LCRs/CBRs more generally.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.009 |
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".