Towards perturbation prediction of biological networks using deep learning
Open accessAbstract
The mapping of the physical interactions between biochemical entities enables quantitative analysis of dynamic biological living systems. While developing a precise dynamical model on biological entity interaction is still challenging due to the limitation of kinetic parameter detection of the underlying biological system. This challenge promotes the needs of topology-based models to predict biochemical perturbation patterns. Pure topology-based model, however, is limited on the scale and heterogeneity of biological networks. Here we propose a learning based model that adopts graph convolutional networks to learn the implicit perturbation pattern factors and thus enhance the perturbation pattern prediction on the basic topology model. Our experimental studies on 87 biological models show an average of 73% accuracy on perturbation pattern prediction and outperforms the best topology-based model by 7%, indicating that the graph-driven neural network model is robust and beneficial for accurate prediction of the perturbation spread modeling and giving an inspiration of the implementation of the deep neural networks on biological network modeling.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
GNNs are commonly used to generate protein representations from chemical and geometric features to predict protein pocket-ligand and protein-protein interaction sites, intra- and inter-molecular energies, binding affinities, complex quality measures, and interface residues.
“GNNs (as described in Section 4.1) are commonly used to generate representations of proteins based on chemical (e.g., free electrons’ and protons donors’ locations) and geometric (e.g., distance-dependent curvature) features to predict protein pocket-ligand and protein-protein interactions sites [116]; intra- and inter-molecule residue contact graphs to predict intra- and inter-molecular energies,”
From Graph representation learning in biomedicine and healthcare (2022) · cites this paper as [116]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 16
- Authors
- Li, D., & Gao, J.
- Affiliations
- Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gao, Jianxi
- ORCID
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2019-08-16
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11941-11941
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6697687
- OpenAlex
- W2967870286
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 1.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1415291092)
- Office of Naval Research (N00014-15-1-2640, N00014)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
- Keywords
- biological networks, graph convolutional networks, kinetic parameter uncertainty
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