Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32374785›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Multifaceted analysis of training and testing convolutional neural networks for protein secondary structure prediction.

Maxim Shapovalov, Roland L Dunbrack, Slobodan Vucetic

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Deep learning for protein secondary structure prediction: Pre and post-AlphaFold.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. PYTHIA: Deep Learning Approach for Local Protein Conformation Prediction.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors.

Maxim ShapovalovFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9349-7647
Roland L DunbrackFox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7674-6667
Slobodan VuceticTemple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States of America.

Funding

Structural Bioinformatics of Proteins and Protein Complexes and Applications to Cancer BiologyR35GM122517 · NIGMS · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI ROLAND L DUNBRACK · 2017 to 2026
$6.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM122517
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein secondary structure prediction remains a vital topic with broad applications. Due to lack of a widely accepted standard in secondary structure predictor evaluation, a fair comparison of predictors is challenging. A detailed examination of factors that contribute to higher accuracy is also lacking. In this paper, we present: (1) new test sets, Test2018, Test2019, and Test2018-2019, consisting of proteins from structures released in 2018 and 2019 with less than 25% identity to any protein published before 2018; (2) a 4-layer convolutional neural network, SecNet, with an input window of ±14 amino acids which was trained on proteins ≤25% identical to proteins in Test2018 and the commonly used CB513 test set; (3) an additional test set that shares no homologous domains with the training set proteins, according to the Evolutionary Classification of Proteins (ECOD) database; (4) a detailed ablation study where we reverse one algorithmic choice at a time in SecNet and evaluate the effect on the prediction accuracy; (5) new 4- and 5-label prediction alphabets that may be more practical for tertiary structure prediction methods. The 3-label accuracy (helix, sheet, coil) of the leading predictors on both Test2018 and CB513 is 81-82%, while SecNet's accuracy is 84% for both sets. Accuracy on the non-homologous ECOD set is only 0.6 points (83.9%) lower than the results on the Test2018-2019 set (84.5%). The ablation study of features, neural network architecture, and training hyper-parameters suggests the best accuracy results are achieved with good choices for each of them while the neural network architecture is not as critical as long as it is not too simple. Protocols for generating and using unbiased test, validation, and training sets are provided. Our data sets, including input features and assigned labels, and SecNet software including third-party dependencies and databases, are downloadable from dunbrack.fccc.edu/ss and github.com/sh-maxim/ss.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerProtein Structure, SecondaryAlgorithmsAmino AcidsAmino Acid SequenceDatabases, ProteinDeep LearningProteinsSoftwareAmino AcidsProteins

Identifiers

PMID32374785
PMCPMC7202669

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.