Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18267018›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2008

Using neural networks and evolutionary information in decoy discrimination for protein tertiary structure prediction.

Ching-Wai Tan, David T Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ching-Wai TanDepartment of Computer Science, University College London, London, UK. chingwai@ntu.edu.sg
David T Jones

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe present a novel method of protein fold decoy discrimination using machine learning, more specifically using neural networks. Here, decoy discrimination is represented as a machine learning problem, where neural networks are used to learn the native-like features of protein structures using a set of positive and negative training examples. A set of native protein structures provides the positive training examples, while negative training examples are simulated decoy structures obtained by reversing the sequences of native structures. Various features are extracted from the training dataset of positive and negative examples and used as inputs to the neural networks.

resultsResults have shown that the best performing neural network is the one that uses input information comprising of PSI-BLAST 1 profiles of residue pairs, pairwise distance and the relative solvent accessibilities of the residues. This neural network is the best among all methods tested in discriminating the native structure from a set of decoys for all decoy datasets tested.

conclusionThis method is demonstrated to be viable, and furthermore evolutionary information is successfully used in the neural networks to improve decoy discrimination.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularNeural Networks, ComputerAmino Acid SequenceDiscriminant AnalysisMolecular Sequence DataPattern Recognition, AutomatedProteinsProtein Structure, TertiarySequence Analysis, ProteinProteins

Identifiers

PMID18267018
PMCPMC2267779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.