Towards a more accurate and reliable evaluation of machine learning protein-protein interaction prediction model performance in the presence of unavoidable dataset biases.

IF 1.5 Q3 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Alba Nogueira-Rodríguez, Daniel Glez-Peña, Cristina P Vieira, Jorge Vieira, Hugo López-Fernández
{"title":"Towards a more accurate and reliable evaluation of machine learning protein-protein interaction prediction model performance in the presence of unavoidable dataset biases.","authors":"Alba Nogueira-Rodríguez, Daniel Glez-Peña, Cristina P Vieira, Jorge Vieira, Hugo López-Fernández","doi":"10.1515/jib-2024-0054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The characterization of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) is fundamental to understand cellular functions. Although machine learning methods in this task have historically reported prediction accuracies up to 95 %, including those only using raw protein sequences, it has been highlighted that this could be overestimated due to the use of random splits and metrics that do not take into account potential biases in the datasets. Here, we propose a per-protein utility metric, pp_MCC, able to show a drop in the performance in both random and unseen-protein splits scenarios. We tested ML models based on sequence embeddings. The pp_MCC metric evidences a reduced performance even in a random split, reaching levels similar to those shown by the raw MCC metric computed over an unseen protein split, and drops even further when the pp_MCC is used in an unseen protein split scenario. Thus, the metric is able to give a more realistic performance estimation while allowing to use random splits, which could be interesting for more protein-centric studies. Given the low adjusted performance obtained, there seems to be room for improvement when using only primary sequence information, suggesting the need of inclusion of complementary protein data, accompanied with the use of the pp_MCC metric.</p>","PeriodicalId":53625,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrative Bioinformatics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrative Bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jib-2024-0054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The characterization of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) is fundamental to understand cellular functions. Although machine learning methods in this task have historically reported prediction accuracies up to 95 %, including those only using raw protein sequences, it has been highlighted that this could be overestimated due to the use of random splits and metrics that do not take into account potential biases in the datasets. Here, we propose a per-protein utility metric, pp_MCC, able to show a drop in the performance in both random and unseen-protein splits scenarios. We tested ML models based on sequence embeddings. The pp_MCC metric evidences a reduced performance even in a random split, reaching levels similar to those shown by the raw MCC metric computed over an unseen protein split, and drops even further when the pp_MCC is used in an unseen protein split scenario. Thus, the metric is able to give a more realistic performance estimation while allowing to use random splits, which could be interesting for more protein-centric studies. Given the low adjusted performance obtained, there seems to be room for improvement when using only primary sequence information, suggesting the need of inclusion of complementary protein data, accompanied with the use of the pp_MCC metric.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Integrative Bioinformatics
Journal of Integrative Bioinformatics Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
27
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信