ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2024
Systematic investigation of machine learning on limited data: A study on predicting protein-protein binding strength.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hybrid Approach to Protein-Protein Complex Affinity Prediction Based on Language Models and Molecular Dynamics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- A multiscale, Bayesian inference approach to augment mechanistic models of cell signaling with machine-learning predictions of binding affinity.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- An interpretable molecular framework for predicting cancer driver missense mutations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- D81 Mutants Reveal Hidden EF-Tu Diversity while Natural Sequences Preserve Aspartate.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- PCANN Program for Structure-Based Prediction of Protein-Protein Binding Affinity: Comparison With Other Neural-Network Predictors.Proteins · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of machine learning techniques in biological research, especially when dealing with limited data availability, poses significant challenges. In this study, we leveraged advancements in method development for predicting protein-protein binding strength to conduct a systematic investigation into the application of machine learning on limited data. The binding strength, quantitatively measured as binding affinity, is vital for understanding the processes of recognition, association, and dysfunction that occur within protein complexes. By incorporating transfer learning, integrating domain knowledge, and employing both deep learning and traditional machine learning algorithms, we mitigated the impact of data limitations and made significant advancements in predicting protein-protein binding affinity. In particular, we developed over 20 models, ultimately selecting three representative best-performing ones that belong to distinct categories. The first model is structure-based, consisting of a random forest regression and thirteen handcrafted features. The second model is sequence-based, employing an architecture that combines transferred embedding features with a multilayer perceptron. Finally, we created an ensemble model by averaging the predictions of the two aforementioned models. The comparison with other predictors on three independent datasets confirms the significant improvements achieved by our models in predicting protein-protein binding affinity. The programs for running these three models are available at https://github.com/minghuilab/BindPPI.
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.