ArticleJournal of proteomics2021
Deep learning embedder method and tool for mass spectra similarity search.
Article in Journal of proteomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- SpecEncoder: deep metric learning for accurate peptide identification in proteomics.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Good practices and recommendations for using and benchmarking computational metabolomics metabolite annotation tools.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2022Review
- Memory-Efficient Searching of Gas-Chromatography Mass Spectra Accelerated by Prescreening.Metabolites · 2022Article
- The PRIDE database resources in 2022: a hub for mass spectrometry-based proteomics evidences.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
- SpeCollate: Deep cross-modal similarity network for mass spectrometry data based peptide deductions.PloS one · 2021Article
- The language of proteins: NLP, machine learning & protein sequences.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2021Review
- Proteomic repository data submission, dissemination, and reuse: key messages.Expert review of proteomicsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spectral similarity calculation is widely used in protein identification tools and mass spectra clustering algorithms while comparing theoretical or experimental spectra. The performance of the spectral similarity calculation plays an important role in these tools and algorithms especially in the analysis of large-scale datasets. Recently, deep learning methods have been proposed to improve the performance of clustering algorithms and protein identification by training the algorithms with existing data and the use of multiple spectra and identified peptide features. While the efficiency of these algorithms is still under study in comparison with traditional approaches, their application in proteomics data analysis is becoming more common. Here, we propose the use of deep learning to improve spectral similarity comparison. We assessed the performance of deep learning for spectral similarity, with GLEAMS and a newly trained embedder model (DLEAMSE), which uses high-quality spectra from PRIDE Cluster. Also, we developed a new bioinformatics tool (mslookup - https://github.com/bigbio/DLEAMSE/) that allows users to quickly search for spectra in previously identified mass spectra publish in public repositories and spectral libraries. Finally, we released a human database to enable bioinformaticians and biologists to search for identified spectra in their machines. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Spectral similarity calculation plays an important role in proteomics data analysis. With deep learning's ability to learn the implicit and effective features from large-scale training datasets, deep learning-based MS/MS spectra embedding models has emerged as a solution to improve mass spectral clustering similarity calculation algorithms. We compare multiple similarity scoring and deep learning methods in terms of accuracy (compute the similarity for a pair of the mass spectrum) and computing-time performance. The benchmark results showed no major differences in accuracy between DLEAMSE and normalized dot product for spectrum similarity calculations. The DLEAMSE GPU implementation is faster than NDP in preprocessing on the GPU server and the similarity calculation of DLEAMSE (Euclidean distance on 32-D vectors) takes about 1/3 of dot product calculations. The deep learning model (DLEAMSE) encoding and embedding steps needed to run once for each spectrum and the embedded 32-D points can be persisted in the repository for future comparison, which is faster for future comparisons and large-scale data. Based on these, we proposed a new tool mslookup that enables the researcher to find spectra previously identified in public data. The tool can be also used to generate in-house databases of previously identified spectra to share with other laboratories and consortiums.
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.