ArticleJournal of proteome research2024
Systematic Assessment of Deep Learning-Based Predictors of Fragmentation Intensity Profiles.
Article in Journal of proteome research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- FastSpel: A Method for Fast Spectral Library Generation.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- Peptide Property Prediction for Mass Spectrometry Using AI: An Introduction to State of the Art Models.Proteomics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, several deep learning-based methods have been proposed for predicting peptide fragment intensities. This study aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of six such methods, namely Prosit, DeepMass:Prism, pDeep3, AlphaPeptDeep, Prosit Transformer, and the method proposed by Guan et al. To this end, we evaluated the accuracy of the predicted intensity profiles for close to 1.7 million precursors (including both tryptic and HLA peptides) corresponding to more than 18 million experimental spectra procured from 40 independent submissions to the PRIDE repository that were acquired for different species using a variety of instruments and different dissociation types/energies. Specifically, for each method, distributions of similarity (measured by Pearson's correlation and normalized angle) between the predicted and the corresponding experimental
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.