Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41971693›Full record

ArticleACS polymers Au2026

Identifying Polymers that Bind or Reject Proteins with Machine Learning: Handling Categorical Features within a GPR Model.

Ramindu De Silva, Wei Ge, Carolin Bapp, Ahmed Z Mustafa, Robert Chapman, Yanan Fan, Scott A Sisson, Martina H Stenzel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS polymers Au, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Ramindu De SilvaSchool of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia.
Wei GeSchool of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia.
Carolin BappSchool of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales 2308, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9426-0033
Ahmed Z MustafaSchool of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia.
Robert ChapmanSchool of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales 2308, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2333-1473
Yanan FanData61, CSIRO, Sydney, New South Wales 2015, Australia.
Scott A SissonSchool of Mathematics and Statistics & UNSW Data Science Hub, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia.
Martina H StenzelSchool of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6433-4419

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the interaction between polymers and proteins is of interest for researchers in medicine, biology, food science, and water treatment, among other fields. The goal may be to create strong interactions with enzymes to improve their catalytic stability, while in nanomedicine and biomedical engineering, the focus is often on reducing protein adsorption on polymer surfaces. Researchers have developed libraries of polymers with various monomer combinations and tested their binding to different proteins to better understand these interactions. In this work, we aimed to identify the polymer with the highest or lowest binding affinity to all proteins, respectively, using Gaussian Process Regression (GPR). However, incorporating categorical features such as the type of monomer has not been widely applied in GPR. Here we compare a range of process models, which were coined Multiplicative kernel, Additive kernel, Easy to interpret Gaussian Process model (EzGP), Latent Variable Gaussian Processes (LVGP), and the Latent Map Gaussian Processes (LMGP) by their developers. The LVGP model was found to perform best on the polymer-protein data set, where the output for binding strength was given by Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET), which can be used to help generate large data sets for machine learning (ML). The polymer that had the highest affinity to glucose oxidase (GOx), uricase (Uri), casein (Cas), trypsin (Trp), carbonic anhydrase (CAn) and bovine serum albumin (BSA) carried positive charges as well as hydrophobic benzyl groups. Negatively charged monomers dominated the polymer that rejected the most proteins intermixed with some cationic units, reminiscent of zwitterionic polymers.

Indexed as

categorical featuresGaussian process regression (GPR)machine learningpolymerprotein

Identifiers

PMID41971693
PMCPMC13067167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.