Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22783946›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2012

Automated identification of protein-ligand interaction features using Inductive Logic Programming: a hexose binding case study.

Jose C A Santos, Houssam Nassif, David Page, Stephen H Muggleton, Michael J E Sternberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Jose C A SantosComputational Bioinformatics Laboratory, Department of Computer Science, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2BZ, UK. jcs06@doc.ic.ac.uk
Houssam Nassif
David Page
Stephen H Muggleton
Michael J E Sternberg

Funding

Machine Learning for Improved Mammography ScreeningR01CA127379 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BURNSIDE, ELIZABETH S · 2007 to 2010
$1.4M
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council B19118NCI NIH HHS R01CA127379-01Wellcome Trust 0807/12/Z/06/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need for automated methods to learn general features of the interactions of a ligand class with its diverse set of protein receptors. An appropriate machine learning approach is Inductive Logic Programming (ILP), which automatically generates comprehensible rules in addition to prediction. The development of ILP systems which can learn rules of the complexity required for studies on protein structure remains a challenge. In this work we use a new ILP system, ProGolem, and demonstrate its performance on learning features of hexose-protein interactions.

resultsThe rules induced by ProGolem detect interactions mediated by aromatics and by planar-polar residues, in addition to less common features such as the aromatic sandwich. The rules also reveal a previously unreported dependency for residues cys and leu. They also specify interactions involving aromatic and hydrogen bonding residues. This paper shows that Inductive Logic Programming implemented in ProGolem can derive rules giving structural features of protein/ligand interactions. Several of these rules are consistent with descriptions in the literature.

conclusionsIn addition to confirming literature results, ProGolem's model has a 10-fold cross-validated predictive accuracy that is superior, at the 95% confidence level, to another ILP system previously used to study protein/hexose interactions and is comparable with state-of-the-art statistical learners.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceProtein BindingHexosesLigandsProteinsHexosesLigandsProteins

Identifiers

PMID22783946
PMCPMC3458898

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.