Cited by 25Protein Structure and DynamicsMachine Learning in BioinformaticsComputational Drug Discovery Methods

Improved inter-protein contact prediction using dimensional hybrid residual networks and protein language models

Open access
Si, Yunda, Yan, Chengfei·2023·Briefings in Bioinformatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The knowledge of contacting residue pairs between interacting proteins is very useful for the structural characterization of protein–protein interactions (PPIs). However, accurately identifying the tens of contacting ones from hundreds of thousands of inter-protein residue pairs is extremely challenging, and performances of the state-of-the-art inter-protein contact prediction methods are still quite limited. In this study, we developed a deep learning method for inter-protein contact prediction, which is referred to as DRN-1D2D_Inter. Specifically, we employed pretrained protein language models to generate structural information-enriched input features to residual networks formed by dimensional hybrid residual blocks to perform inter-protein contact prediction. Extensively bechmarking DRN-1D2D_Inter on multiple datasets, including both heteromeric PPIs and homomeric PPIs, we show DRN-1D2D_Inter consistently and significantly outperformed two state-of-the-art inter-protein contact prediction methods, including GLINTER and DeepHomo, although both the latter two methods leveraged the native structures of interacting proteins in the prediction, and DRN-1D2D_Inter made the prediction purely from sequences. We further show that applying the predicted contacts as constraints for protein–protein docking can significantly improve its performance for protein complex structure prediction.

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 · 10.1093/bib/bbad039

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Si, Y., & Yan, C.
Affiliations
Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
Corresponding author
Yan, Chengfei
Venue
Briefings in Bioinformatics
Published
2023-02-09
Volume
24
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-4054
OpenAlex
W4319826837
Cited by
25
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6
FWCI
2.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Briefings in Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Huazhong University of Science and Technology (3004012167)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (32101001)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
Keywords
protein-protein interaction, protein language models, heteromeric protein complexes, protein-protein docking, protein complex structure prediction
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Proteins, Computational Biology

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