Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26606303›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Machine Learning: How Much Does It Tell about Protein Folding Rates?

Marc Corrales, Pol Cuscó, Dinara R Usmanova, Heng-Chang Chen, Natalya S Bogatyreva, Guillaume J Filion, Dmitry N Ivankov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Marc CorralesGenome Architecture, Gene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona, Spain.
Pol CuscóGenome Architecture, Gene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona, Spain.
Dinara R UsmanovaUniversitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.
Heng-Chang ChenGenome Architecture, Gene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona, Spain.
Natalya S BogatyrevaUniversitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.
Guillaume J FilionGenome Architecture, Gene Regulation, Stem Cells and Cancer Programme, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona, Spain.
Dmitry N IvankovUniversitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prediction of protein folding rates is a necessary step towards understanding the principles of protein folding. Due to the increasing amount of experimental data, numerous protein folding models and predictors of protein folding rates have been developed in the last decade. The problem has also attracted the attention of scientists from computational fields, which led to the publication of several machine learning-based models to predict the rate of protein folding. Some of them claim to predict the logarithm of protein folding rate with an accuracy greater than 90%. However, there are reasons to believe that such claims are exaggerated due to large fluctuations and overfitting of the estimates. When we confronted three selected published models with new data, we found a much lower predictive power than reported in the original publications. Overly optimistic predictive powers appear from violations of the basic principles of machine-learning. We highlight common misconceptions in the studies claiming excessive predictive power and propose to use learning curves as a safeguard against those mistakes. As an example, we show that the current amount of experimental data is insufficient to build a linear predictor of logarithms of folding rates based on protein amino acid composition.

Indexed as

Machine LearningProtein FoldingProteinsReproducibility of ResultsProteins

Identifiers

PMID26606303
PMCPMC4659572

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.