Protein quality assessment with a loss function designed for high-quality decoys.

Motivation: The prediction of a protein 3D structure is essential for understanding protein function, drug discovery, and disease mechanisms; with the advent of methods like AlphaFold that are capable of producing very high-quality decoys, ensuring the quality of those decoys can provide further confidence in the accuracy of their predictions. Results: In this work, we describe Qϵ, a graph convolutional network (GCN) that utilizes a minimal set of atom and residue features as inputs to predict the global distance test total score (GDTTS) and local distance difference test (lDDT) score of a decoy. To improve the model's performance, we introduce a novel loss function based on the ϵ-insensitive loss function used for SVM regression. This loss function is specifically designed for evaluating the characteristics of the quality assessment problem and provides predictions with improved accuracy over standard loss functions used for this task. Despite using only a minimal set of features, it matches the performance of recent state-of-the-art methods like DeepUMQA. Availability: The code for Qϵ is available at https://github.com/soumyadip1997/qepsilon.

aPPRove: An HMM-Based Method for Accurate Prediction of RNA-Pentatricopeptide Repeat Protein Binding Events.

Pentatricopeptide repeat containing proteins (PPRs) bind to RNA transcripts originating from mitochondria and plastids. There are two classes of PPR proteins. The [Formula: see text] class contains tandem [Formula: see text]-type motif sequences, and the [Formula: see text] class contains alternating [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] type sequences. In this paper, we describe a novel tool that predicts PPR-RNA interaction; specifically, our method, which we call aPPRove, determines where and how a [Formula: see text]-class PPR protein will bind to RNA when given a PPR and one or more RNA transcripts by using a combinatorial binding code for site specificity proposed by Barkan et al. Our results demonstrate that aPPRove successfully locates how and where a PPR protein belonging to the [Formula: see text] class can bind to RNA. For each binding event it outputs the binding site, the amino-acid-nucleotide interaction, and its statistical significance. Furthermore, we show that our method can be used to predict binding events for [Formula: see text]-class proteins using a known edit site and the statistical significance of aligning the PPR protein to that site. In particular, we use our method to make a conjecture regarding an interaction between CLB19 and the second intronic region of ycf3. The aPPRove web server can be found at www.cs.colostate.edu/~approve.

The use of gene ontology evidence codes in preventing classifier assessment bias.

MOTIVATION: The biological community's reliance on computational annotations of protein function makes correct assessment of function prediction methods an issue of great importance. The fact that a large fraction of the annotations in current biological databases are based on computational methods can lead to bias in estimating the accuracy of function prediction methods. This can happen since predicting an annotation that was derived computationally in the first place is likely easier than predicting annotations that were derived experimentally, leading to over-optimistic classifier performance estimates. RESULTS: We illustrate this phenomenon in a set of controlled experiments using a nearest neighbor classifier that uses PSI-BLAST similarity scores. Our results demonstrate that the source of Gene Ontology (GO) annotations used to assess a protein function predictor can have a highly significant influence on classifier accuracy: the average accuracy over four species and over GO terms in the biological process namespace increased from 0.72 to 0.87 when the classifier was given access to annotations that are assigned evidence codes that indicate a possible computational source, instead of experimentally determined annotations. Slightly smaller increases were observed in the other namespaces. In these comparisons the total number of annotations and their distribution across GO terms were kept the same. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, taking into account GO evidence codes is required for reporting accuracy statistics that do not overestimate a model's performance, and is of particular importance for a fair comparison of classifiers that rely on different information sources. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.