Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41990018›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Revisiting co-expression-based automated function prediction in yeast with neural networks and updated Gene Ontology annotations.

Cole E McGuire, Matthew A Hibbs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

2 authors.

Cole E McGuireDepartment of Computer Science, Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2219-7934
Matthew A HibbsDepartment of Computer Science, Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6334-3611

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automated function prediction (AFP) is the process of predicting the function of genes or proteins with machine learning models trained on high-throughput biological data. Deep learning with neural networks has become the dominant machine learning methodology of contemporary AFP models. However, it is unclear what difference exists between neural networks and classical machine learning techniques for AFP. Therefore, we created a model of AFP in yeast using feedforward neural networks that is trained on gene co-expression data to predict Gene Ontology (GO) labels and directly compared it to two previous, experimentally-validated AFP models. When trained on the same input data, our model outperforms these classical machine learning models (a Bayesian network and adaptive query-driven search) when predicting individual genes involved in mitochondrion organization. In particular, we found our neural network model better distinguished mis-annotated negatives in its training data. Finally, we quantified how differences in gene expression data and Gene Ontology annotations affect the performance of our model across each of its predicted GO terms. Our results suggest that feedforward neural networks can be more performant and robust to GO mis-annotations compared to the specific classical approaches examined here for co-expression-based AFP of some biological processes.

Indexed as

Gene OntologyNeural Networks, ComputerSaccharomyces cerevisiaeBayes TheoremGene Expression Regulation, FungalMachine LearningMolecular Sequence AnnotationPrediction AlgorithmsPredictive Learning ModelsSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSaccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins

Identifiers

PMID41990018
PMCPMC13086303

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.