Computational design and evaluation of optimal bait sets for scalable proximity proteomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial organization of proteins within eukaryotic cells underlies essential biological processes and can be mapped by identifying nearby proteins using proximity-dependent biotinylation approaches such as BioID. When applied systematically to hundreds of bait proteins, BioID has localized thousands of endogenous proteins in human cells, generating a comprehensive view of subcellular organization. However, the need for large bait sets limits the scalability of BioID for context-dependent spatial profiling across different cell types, states, or perturbations. To address this, we develop a benchmarking framework with multiple complementary metrics to assess how well a given bait subset recapitulates the structure and coverage of a reference BioID dataset. We also introduce GENBAIT, a genetic algorithm-based method that identifies optimized bait subsets predicted to retain maximal spatial information while reducing the total number of baits. Applied to three large BioID datasets, GENBAIT consistently selected subsets representing less than one-third of the original baits while preserving high coverage and network integrity. This flexible, data-driven approach enables intelligent bait selection for targeted, context-specific studies, thereby expanding the accessibility of large-scale subcellular proteome mapping.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".