ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023
Predicting enzymatic function of protein sequences with attention.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative machine learning approaches for enzyme kinetic parameter prediction.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- Fast structural search for classification of gut bacterial mucin O-glycan degrading enzymes.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- EnzymeHunter: Achieving fine-grained enzyme function prediction with a hierarchically aware contrastive learning framework.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Protein Language Models: Applications and Perspectives.Journal of proteome research · 2026Review
- Approaches for accelerating microbial gene function discovery using artificial intelligence.Nature microbiology · 2026Review
- EC-Bench: a benchmark for enzyme commission number prediction.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in protein-based detection and inhibition of AMR pathways.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2025Review
- Autoregressive enzyme function prediction with multi-scale multi-modality fusion.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Pool PaRTI: a PageRank-based pooling method for identifying critical residues and enhancing protein sequence representations.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Pool PaRTI: A PageRank-Based Pooling Method for Identifying Critical Residues and Enhancing Protein Sequence Representations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- DeepES: deep learning-based enzyme screening to identify orphan enzyme genes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Comparative Assessment of Protein Large Language Models for Enzyme Commission Number Prediction.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- ProteinReDiff: Complex-based ligand-binding proteins redesign by equivariant diffusion-based generative models.Structural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Opportunities and Challenges for Machine Learning-Assisted Enzyme Engineering.ACS central science · 2024Review
- Precision enzyme discovery through targeted mining of metagenomic data.Natural products and bioprospecting · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationThere is a growing number of available protein sequences, but only a limited amount has been manually annotated. For example, only 0.25% of all entries of UniProtKB are reviewed by human annotators. Further developing automatic tools to infer protein function from sequence alone can alleviate part of this gap. In this article, we investigate the potential of Transformer deep neural networks on a specific case of functional sequence annotation: the prediction of enzymatic classes.
resultsWe show that our EnzBert transformer models, trained to predict Enzyme Commission (EC) numbers by specialization of a protein language model, outperforms state-of-the-art tools for monofunctional enzyme class prediction based on sequences only. Accuracy is improved from 84% to 95% on the prediction of EC numbers at level two on the EC40 benchmark. To evaluate the prediction quality at level four, the most detailed level of EC numbers, we built two new time-based benchmarks for comparison with state-of-the-art methods ECPred and DeepEC: the macro-F1 score is respectively improved from 41% to 54% and from 20% to 26%. Finally, we also show that using a simple combination of attention maps is on par with, or better than, other classical interpretability methods on the EC prediction task. More specifically, important residues identified by attention maps tend to correspond to known catalytic sites. Quantitatively, we report a max F-Gain score of 96.05%, while classical interpretability methods reach 91.44% at best. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code and datasets are respectively available at https://gitlab.inria.fr/nbuton/tfpc and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7253910.
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.