Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27618812›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016

Protein secondary structure prediction using a small training set (compact model) combined with a Complex-valued neural network approach.

Shamima Rashid, Saras Saraswathi, Andrzej Kloczkowski, Suresh Sundaram, Andrzej Kolinski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. 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. Deep learning for protein secondary structure prediction: Pre and post-AlphaFold.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  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

5 authors.

Shamima RashidSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, Singapore, 639798, Singapore.
Saras SaraswathiBattelle Center for Mathematical Medicine, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, 700 Children's Drive, Columbus, USA.
Andrzej KloczkowskiBattelle Center for Mathematical Medicine, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, 700 Children's Drive, Columbus, USA.
Suresh SundaramSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Ave, Singapore, 639798, Singapore. ssundaram@ntu.edu.sg.
Andrzej KolinskiLaboratory of Theory of Biopolymers, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Warsaw, Pasteura 1, Warsaw, 02-093, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProtein secondary structure prediction (SSP) has been an area of intense research interest. Despite advances in recent methods conducted on large datasets, the estimated upper limit accuracy is yet to be reached. Since the predictions of SSP methods are applied as input to higher-level structure prediction pipelines, even small errors may have large perturbations in final models. Previous works relied on cross validation as an estimate of classifier accuracy. However, training on large numbers of protein chains compromises the classifier ability to generalize to new sequences. This prompts a novel approach to training and an investigation into the possible structural factors that lead to poor predictions. Here, a small group of 55 proteins termed the compact model is selected from the CB513 dataset using a heuristics-based approach. In a prior work, all sequences were represented as probability matrices of residues adopting each of Helix, Sheet and Coil states, based on energy calculations using the C-Alpha, C-Beta, Side-chain (CABS) algorithm. The functional relationship between the conformational energies computed with CABS force-field and residue states is approximated using a classifier termed the Fully Complex-valued Relaxation Network (FCRN). The FCRN is trained with the compact model proteins.

resultsThe performance of the compact model is compared with traditional cross-validated accuracies and blind-tested on a dataset of G Switch proteins, obtaining accuracies of ∼81 %. The model demonstrates better results when compared to several techniques in the literature. A comparative case study of the worst performing chain identifies hydrogen bond contacts that lead to Coil ⇔ Sheet misclassifications. Overall, mispredicted Coil residues have a higher propensity to participate in backbone hydrogen bonding than correctly predicted Coils.

conclusionsThe implications of these findings are: (i) the choice of training proteins is important in preserving the generalization of a classifier to predict new sequences accurately and (ii) SSP techniques sensitive in distinguishing between backbone hydrogen bonding and side-chain or water-mediated hydrogen bonding might be needed in the reduction of Coil ⇔ Sheet misclassifications.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerHumansProteinsProtein Structure, SecondaryProteinsCompact modelComplex-valued relaxation networkEfficient learningHeuristicsInhibitor peptidesProtein structureSecondary structure prediction

Identifiers

PMID27618812
PMCPMC5020447

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.