2023
DOI: 10.1109/tcbb.2022.3190933
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Protein-DNA Binding Residues Prediction Using a Deep Learning Model With Hierarchical Feature Extraction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To demonstrate the strong performance of the proposed ULDNA, we made a comparison with 12 existing popular DNA-binding site predictors, including BindN [ 57 ], ProteDNA [ 58 ], BindN+ [ 59 ], MetaDBSite [ 28 ], DP-Bind [ 60 ], DNABind [ 61 ], TargetDNA [ 27 ], iProDNA-CapsNet [ 34 ], DNAPred [ 13 ], Guan’s method [ 32 ], COACH [ 16 ] and PredDBR [ 33 ], on the PDNA-41 test dataset under independent validation, as summarized in Table 2 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To demonstrate the strong performance of the proposed ULDNA, we made a comparison with 12 existing popular DNA-binding site predictors, including BindN [ 57 ], ProteDNA [ 58 ], BindN+ [ 59 ], MetaDBSite [ 28 ], DP-Bind [ 60 ], DNABind [ 61 ], TargetDNA [ 27 ], iProDNA-CapsNet [ 34 ], DNAPred [ 13 ], Guan’s method [ 32 ], COACH [ 16 ] and PredDBR [ 33 ], on the PDNA-41 test dataset under independent validation, as summarized in Table 2 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, most of these methods are driven by simple and straightforward feature representation methods, such as sequence composition coding and evolution conservation analysis, which fail to capture the complex patterns of protein–DNA interaction [ 30 , 31 ]. To partially address this challenge, deep learning techniques have been employed in recently proposed DNA-binding site prediction methods, such as Guan’s method [ 32 ], PredDBR [ 33 ], iProDNA-CapsNet [ 34 ] and GraphBind [ 35 ]. The significant advantage of deep learning techniques over traditional machine learning methods is that they tend to derive more discriminative feature representations using complicated networks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To demonstrate the strong performance of the proposed ULDNA, we compared it with iProDNA-CapsNet [32], DNAPred [10], Guan's method [30], COACH [13], and…”
Section: Comparison With Existing Dna-binding Site Predictorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…; https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05. 30.542787 doi: bioRxiv preprint of informative feature representation methods, as most of the approaches are based on simple feature representations, such as amino acid coding, physiochemical properties, and evolution conservation, which cannot fully extract the complex pattern of protein-DNA interaction [28,29]. To partly overcome this barrier, several methods, e.g., Guan's method [30], PredDBR [31], iProDNA-CapsNet [32], and GraphBind [33], utilize deep learning technology to predict DNA-binding sites.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation