Epitope-TCR Interaction Prediction with Deep Learning based on Sequence and Physicochemical Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immune system cells are capable of defending our body from attack by a pathogen if they succeed to recognize the pathogen as a threat before its attack. The recognition of chewed up fragments of the antigen (epitope) by immune system cells (TCR) can be predicted by successful epitope-TCR recognition. However, testing numerous epitope-TCR sequences experimentally for interaction is very time and resource consuming. Predicting this interaction computationally before testing them in the laboratory can help with effective vaccination and personalized healthcare. In this study, I addressed the interaction prediction task in the unseen epitope setting by developing a pairwise combination based model, and in the unseen TCR setting by developing an ensemble learning model with sequence based calculations. In the pairwise combination based model for unseen epitope-TCR interaction prediction, the pairwise epitope and TCR sequences are used simultaneously to generate images like features using absolute difference and vector outer product of constituent amino acid's physicochemical properties. The best performing physicochemical properties have been selected and found to exhibit much higher performance in comparison to the existing unseen epitope prediction models. The absolute difference based model produced an AUC of 0.64 with only two best performing physicochemical properties, namely, Hydrophobicity and Net Charge Index. The vector outer product based model produced an AUC of 0.60 with the same two properties. Furthermore, the model achieved an AUC of 0.82 by combining both types of features while the best competing model had an AUC of 0.55 for similar setting and dataset. In the ensemble learning model for predicting unseen TCR-epitope interactions, the features were generated using physicochemical property vector, one hot vector, and ProtBERT embedding vector. During the model training, the equally-long sequences were created by zero padding and a masking strategy is adopted to mitigate the noises which may have been introduced by the zero padding. The best performing models using physicochemical property vector, one hot vector, and ProtBERT embedding vector achieved AUC values of 0.74, 0.78 and 0.77, respectively. Moreover, the ensemble learning model based on the individually predicted posterior probabilities achieved an AUC of 0.79, which is convincingly better than the existing best performing methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".