Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 436

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prediction‐based fingerprints of protein–protein interactions

Porollo, Aleksey, Meller, Jarosław·2007·Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics

Abstract

The recognition of protein interaction sites is an important intermediate step toward identification of functionally relevant residues and understanding protein function, facilitating experimental efforts in that regard. Toward that goal, the authors propose a novel representation for the recognition of protein–protein interaction sites that integrates enhanced relative solvent accessibility (RSA) predictions with high resolution structural data. An observation that RSA predictions are biased toward the level of surface exposure consistent with protein complexes led the authors to investigate the difference between the predicted and actual (i.e., observed in an unbound structure) RSA of an amino acid residue as a fingerprint of interaction sites. The authors demonstrate that RSA prediction‐based fingerprints of protein interactions significantly improve the discrimination between interacting and noninteracting sites, compared with evolutionary conservation, physicochemical characteristics, structure‐derived and other features considered before. On the basis of these observations, the authors developed a new method for the prediction of protein–protein interaction sites, using machine learning approaches to combine the most informative features into the final predictor. For training and validation, the authors used several large sets of protein complexes and derived from them nonredundant representative chains, with interaction sites mapped from multiple complexes. Alternative machine learning techniques are used, including Support Vector Machines and Neural Networks, so as to evaluate the relative effects of the choice of a representation and a specific learning algorithm. The effects of induced fit and uncertainty of the negative (noninteracting) class assignment are also evaluated. Several representative methods from the literature are reimplemented to enable direct comparison of the results. Using rigorous validation protocols, the authors estimated that the new method yields the overall classification accuracy of about 74% and Matthews correlation coefficients of 0.42, as opposed to up to 70% classification accuracy and up to 0.3 Matthews correlation coefficient for methods that do not utilize RSA prediction‐based fingerprints. The new method is available at http://sppider.cchmc.org. Proteins 2007. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/prot.21248

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 436

Metadata

Authors
Porollo, A., & Meller, J.
Venue
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-12-06
Volume
66
Issue
3
Pages
630-645
ISSN
  • 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0134
OpenAlex
W2141627824
Cited by
436
References
6
FWCI
2.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prediction‐based fingerprints of protein–protein interactions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/prot.21248
The paper
Porollo, A., & Meller, J. (2007). Prediction‐based fingerprints of protein–protein interactions. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.21248

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.