从经典自然语言处理工具和基于机器学习的自然语言处理工具中得出的蛋白质-蛋白质相互作用网络。

IF 3.8 2区 生物学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Journal of Proteome Research Pub Date : 2024-12-06 Epub Date: 2024-11-11 DOI:10.1021/acs.jproteome.4c00535
David J Degnan, Clayton W Strauch, Moses Y Obiri, Erik D VonKaenel, Grace S Kim, James D Kershaw, David L Novelli, Karl Tl Pazdernik, Lisa M Bramer
{"title":"从经典自然语言处理工具和基于机器学习的自然语言处理工具中得出的蛋白质-蛋白质相互作用网络。","authors":"David J Degnan, Clayton W Strauch, Moses Y Obiri, Erik D VonKaenel, Grace S Kim, James D Kershaw, David L Novelli, Karl Tl Pazdernik, Lisa M Bramer","doi":"10.1021/acs.jproteome.4c00535","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) provides insight into various biological mechanisms, including the binding of antibodies to antigens, enzymes to inhibitors or promoters, and receptors to ligands. Recent studies of PPIs have led to significant biological breakthroughs. For example, the study of PPIs involved in the human:SARS-CoV-2 viral infection mechanism aided in the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Though several databases exist for the manual curation of PPI networks, text mining methods have been routinely demonstrated as useful alternatives for newly studied or understudied species, where databases are incomplete. Here, the relationship extraction performance of several open-source classical text processing, machine learning (ML)-based natural language processing (NLP), and large language model (LLM)-based NLP tools was compared. Overall, our results indicated that networks derived from classical methods tend to have high true positive rates at the expense of having overconnected networks, ML-based NLP methods have lower true positive rates but networks with the closest structures to the target network, and LLM-based NLP methods tend to exist between the two other approaches, with variable performances. The selection of a specific NLP approach should be tied to the needs of a study and text availability, as models varied in performance due to the amount of text provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":48,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Proteome Research","volume":" ","pages":"5395-5404"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protein-Protein Interaction Networks Derived from Classical and Machine Learning-Based Natural Language Processing Tools.\",\"authors\":\"David J Degnan, Clayton W Strauch, Moses Y Obiri, Erik D VonKaenel, Grace S Kim, James D Kershaw, David L Novelli, Karl Tl Pazdernik, Lisa M Bramer\",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acs.jproteome.4c00535\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) provides insight into various biological mechanisms, including the binding of antibodies to antigens, enzymes to inhibitors or promoters, and receptors to ligands. Recent studies of PPIs have led to significant biological breakthroughs. For example, the study of PPIs involved in the human:SARS-CoV-2 viral infection mechanism aided in the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Though several databases exist for the manual curation of PPI networks, text mining methods have been routinely demonstrated as useful alternatives for newly studied or understudied species, where databases are incomplete. Here, the relationship extraction performance of several open-source classical text processing, machine learning (ML)-based natural language processing (NLP), and large language model (LLM)-based NLP tools was compared. Overall, our results indicated that networks derived from classical methods tend to have high true positive rates at the expense of having overconnected networks, ML-based NLP methods have lower true positive rates but networks with the closest structures to the target network, and LLM-based NLP methods tend to exist between the two other approaches, with variable performances. The selection of a specific NLP approach should be tied to the needs of a study and text availability, as models varied in performance due to the amount of text provided.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Proteome Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"5395-5404\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Proteome Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.4c00535\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Proteome Research","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.4c00535","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

蛋白质-蛋白质相互作用(PPIs)研究有助于深入了解各种生物机制,包括抗体与抗原的结合、酶与抑制剂或促进剂的结合以及受体与配体的结合。最近对 PPIs 的研究取得了重大的生物学突破。例如,对参与人类:SARS-CoV-2 病毒感染机制的 PPIs 的研究有助于开发 SARS-CoV-2 疫苗。虽然有几个数据库可用于人工整理 PPI 网络,但对于数据库不完整的新研究或研究不足的物种,文本挖掘方法已被证明是有用的替代方法。在此,我们比较了几种开源经典文本处理、基于机器学习(ML)的自然语言处理(NLP)和基于大型语言模型(LLM)的 NLP 工具的关系提取性能。总体而言,我们的研究结果表明,经典方法得出的网络往往具有较高的真阳性率,但代价是网络的过度连接;基于 ML 的 NLP 方法具有较低的真阳性率,但网络结构与目标网络最为接近;而基于 LLM 的 NLP 方法往往介于其他两种方法之间,性能各不相同。具体 NLP 方法的选择应与研究需要和文本可用性挂钩,因为模型的性能因提供的文本数量而异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Protein-Protein Interaction Networks Derived from Classical and Machine Learning-Based Natural Language Processing Tools.

The study of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) provides insight into various biological mechanisms, including the binding of antibodies to antigens, enzymes to inhibitors or promoters, and receptors to ligands. Recent studies of PPIs have led to significant biological breakthroughs. For example, the study of PPIs involved in the human:SARS-CoV-2 viral infection mechanism aided in the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Though several databases exist for the manual curation of PPI networks, text mining methods have been routinely demonstrated as useful alternatives for newly studied or understudied species, where databases are incomplete. Here, the relationship extraction performance of several open-source classical text processing, machine learning (ML)-based natural language processing (NLP), and large language model (LLM)-based NLP tools was compared. Overall, our results indicated that networks derived from classical methods tend to have high true positive rates at the expense of having overconnected networks, ML-based NLP methods have lower true positive rates but networks with the closest structures to the target network, and LLM-based NLP methods tend to exist between the two other approaches, with variable performances. The selection of a specific NLP approach should be tied to the needs of a study and text availability, as models varied in performance due to the amount of text provided.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Proteome Research
Journal of Proteome Research 生物-生化研究方法
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
4.50%
发文量
251
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Proteome Research publishes content encompassing all aspects of global protein analysis and function, including the dynamic aspects of genomics, spatio-temporal proteomics, metabonomics and metabolomics, clinical and agricultural proteomics, as well as advances in methodology including bioinformatics. The theme and emphasis is on a multidisciplinary approach to the life sciences through the synergy between the different types of "omics".
×
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