Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28923002›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2017

Deep learning methods for protein torsion angle prediction.

Haiou Li, Jie Hou, Badri Adhikari, Qiang Lyu, Jianlin Cheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Deep learning in prediction of intrinsic disorder in proteins.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Machine Learning in Drug Discovery: A Review.Artificial intelligence review · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. AI applications in functional genomics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Haiou LiDepartment of Computer Science and Technology, Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, 215006, China.
Jie HouDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA.
Badri AdhikariDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Missouri-St. Louis, 1 University Blvd. 311 Express Scripts Hall, St. Louis, MO, 63121, USA.
Qiang LyuDepartment of Computer Science and Technology, Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, 215006, China.
Jianlin ChengDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA. chengji@missouri.edu.

Funding

Integrated Prediction of Protein Struture at 1D, 2D and 3D LevelsR01GM093123 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI CHENG, JIANLIN · 2010 to 2023
$3.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM093123
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeep learning is one of the most powerful machine learning methods that has achieved the state-of-the-art performance in many domains. Since deep learning was introduced to the field of bioinformatics in 2012, it has achieved success in a number of areas such as protein residue-residue contact prediction, secondary structure prediction, and fold recognition. In this work, we developed deep learning methods to improve the prediction of torsion (dihedral) angles of proteins.

resultsWe design four different deep learning architectures to predict protein torsion angles. The architectures including deep neural network (DNN) and deep restricted Boltzmann machine (DRBN), deep recurrent neural network (DRNN) and deep recurrent restricted Boltzmann machine (DReRBM) since the protein torsion angle prediction is a sequence related problem. In addition to existing protein features, two new features (predicted residue contact number and the error distribution of torsion angles extracted from sequence fragments) are used as input to each of the four deep learning architectures to predict phi and psi angles of protein backbone. The mean absolute error (MAE) of phi and psi angles predicted by DRNN, DReRBM, DRBM and DNN is about 20-21° and 29-30° on an independent dataset. The MAE of phi angle is comparable to the existing methods, but the MAE of psi angle is 29°, 2° lower than the existing methods. On the latest CASP12 targets, our methods also achieved the performance better than or comparable to a state-of-the art method.

conclusionsOur experiment demonstrates that deep learning is a valuable method for predicting protein torsion angles. The deep recurrent network architecture performs slightly better than deep feed-forward architecture, and the predicted residue contact number and the error distribution of torsion angles extracted from sequence fragments are useful features for improving prediction accuracy.

Indexed as

Machine LearningMolecular StructureNeural Networks, ComputerProteinsProtein Structure, SecondaryProteinsDeep learningDeep recurrent neural networkProtein torsion angle predictionRestricted Boltzmann machine

Identifiers

PMID28923002
PMCPMC5604354

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.