Cited by 95Bioinformatics and Genomic NetworksMachine Learning in BioinformaticsProtein Structure and Dynamics

Cracking the black box of deep sequence-based protein–protein interaction prediction

Open access
Bernett, Judith, Blumenthal, David B, List, Markus·2024·Briefings in Bioinformatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Identifying protein–protein interactions (PPIs) is crucial for deciphering biological pathways. Numerous prediction methods have been developed as cheap alternatives to biological experiments, reporting surprisingly high accuracy estimates. We systematically investigated how much reproducible deep learning models depend on data leakage, sequence similarities and node degree information, and compared them with basic machine learning models. We found that overlaps between training and test sets resulting from random splitting lead to strongly overestimated performances. In this setting, models learn solely from sequence similarities and node degrees. When data leakage is avoided by minimizing sequence similarities between training and test set, performances become random. Moreover, baseline models directly leveraging sequence similarity and network topology show good performances at a fraction of the computational cost. Thus, we advocate that any improvements should be reported relative to baseline methods in the future. Our findings suggest that predicting PPIs remains an unsolved task for proteins showing little sequence similarity to previously studied proteins, highlighting that further experimental research into the ‘dark’ protein interactome and better computational methods are needed.

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/bbae076

Cites

4 of 4 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bernett, J., Blumenthal, D. B., & List, M.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
Corresponding author
List, Markus
Venue
Briefings in Bioinformatics
Published
2024-01-22
Volume
25
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-4054
OpenAlex
W4392500220
Cited by
95
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
12.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Briefings in Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Nvidia
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (422216132)
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (031L0309A, 031L0305A)
  • Universität Wien
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
protein-protein interaction prediction, data leakage, sequence similarity, node degree, protein-protein interaction network, baseline model, protein sequence-based prediction
MeSH terms
Machine Learning

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