ArticleBMC bioinformatics2018
Natural language processing in text mining for structural modeling of protein complexes.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decoding the effects of mutation on protein interactions using machine learning.Biophysics reviews · 2025Review
- Predicting the Transition From Depression to Suicidal Ideation Using Facebook Data Among Indian-Bangladeshi Individuals: Protocol for a Cohort Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- pLMSNOSite: an ensemble-based approach for predicting protein S-nitrosylation sites by integrating supervised word embedding and embedding from pre-trained protein language model.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Facial Emotion Recognition Using a Novel Fusion of Convolutional Neural Network and Local Binary Pattern in Crime Investigation.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Use of BP Neural Network Algorithm and Natural Language Processing in the Impact of Social Audit on Enterprise Innovation Ability.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- Overview of methods for characterization and visualization of a protein-protein interaction network in a multi-omics integration context.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2022Review
- Text mining for modeling of protein complexes enhanced by machine learning.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Challenges in protein docking.Current opinion in structural biology · 2020Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Powered Search Tools and Resources in the Fight Against COVID-19.EJIFCC · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStructural modeling of protein-protein interactions produces a large number of putative configurations of the protein complexes. Identification of the near-native models among them is a serious challenge. Publicly available results of biomedical research may provide constraints on the binding mode, which can be essential for the docking. Our text-mining (TM) tool, which extracts binding site residues from the PubMed abstracts, was successfully applied to protein docking (Badal et al., PLoS Comput Biol, 2015; 11: e1004630). Still, many extracted residues were not relevant to the docking.
resultsWe present an extension of the TM tool, which utilizes natural language processing (NLP) for analyzing the context of the residue occurrence. The procedure was tested using generic and specialized dictionaries. The results showed that the keyword dictionaries designed for identification of protein interactions are not adequate for the TM prediction of the binding mode. However, our dictionary designed to distinguish keywords relevant to the protein binding sites led to considerable improvement in the TM performance. We investigated the utility of several methods of context analysis, based on dissection of the sentence parse trees. The machine learning-based NLP filtered the pool of the mined residues significantly more efficiently than the rule-based NLP. Constraints generated by NLP were tested in docking of unbound proteins from the DOCKGROUND X-ray benchmark set 4. The output of the global low-resolution docking scan was post-processed, separately, by constraints from the basic TM, constraints re-ranked by NLP, and the reference constraints. The quality of a match was assessed by the interface root-mean-square deviation. The results showed significant improvement of the docking output when using the constraints generated by the advanced TM with NLP.
conclusionsThe basic TM procedure for extracting protein-protein binding site residues from the PubMed abstracts was significantly advanced by the deep parsing (NLP techniques for contextual analysis) in purging of the initial pool of the extracted residues. Benchmarking showed a substantial increase of the docking success rate based on the constraints generated by the advanced TM with NLP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.