Protein Structure Prediction by Fusion,Bayesian Methods

View Sample PDF

Author(s): Somasheker Akkaladevi (Virginia State University, USA), Ajay K. Katangur (Texas A&M University – Corpus Christi, USA)and Xin Luo (The University of New Mexico, USA)
Copyright: 2009
Pages: 7
Source title: Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Juan Ramón Rabuñal Dopico (University of A Coruña, Spain), Julian Dorado (University of A Coruña, Spain)and Alejandro Pazos (University of A Coruña, Spain)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-849-9.ch195

Keywords: Artificial Intelligence / Computer Science & IT / Information Science Reference

Purchase

View Protein Structure Prediction by Fusion,Bayesian Methods on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

Prediction of protein secondary structure (alpha-helix, beta-sheet, coil) from primary sequence of amino acids is a very challenging and difficult task, and the problem has been approached from several angles. A protein is a sequence of amino acid residues and can thus be considered as a one dimensional chain of ‘beads’ where each bead correspond to one of the 20 different amino acid residues known to occur in proteins. The length of most protein sequence ranges from 50 residues to about 1000 residues but longer proteins are also known, e.g. myosin, the major protein of muscle fibers, consists of 1800 residues (Altschul et al. 1997). Many techniques were used many researchers to predict the protein secondary structure, but the most commonly used technique for protein secondary structure prediction is the neural network (Qian et al. 1988). This chapter discusses a new method combining profile-based neural networks (Rost et al. 1993b), Simulated Annealing (SA) (Akkaladevi et al. 2005; Simons et al. 1997), Genetic algorithm (GA) (Akkaladevi et al. 2005) and the decision fusion algorithms (Akkaladevi et al. 2005). Researchers used the neural network (Hopfield 1982) combined with GA and SA algorithms, and then applied the two decision fusion methods; committee method and the correlation methods and obtained improved results on the prediction accuracy (Akkaladevi et al. 2005). Sequence profiles of amino acids are fed as input to the profile-based neural network. The two decision fusion methods improved the prediction accuracy, but noticeably one method worked better in some cases and the other method for some other sequence profiles of amino acids as input (Akkaladevi et al. 2005). Instead of compromising on some of the good solutions that could have generated from either approach, a combination of these two approaches is used for obtaining better prediction accuracy. This criterion is the basis for the Bayesian inference method (Anandalingam et al. 1989; Schmidler et al. 2000; Simons et al. 1997). The results obtained show that the prediction accuracy improves by more than 2% using the combination of the decision fusion approach and the Bayesian inference method.

The IRMA Community

Research IRM

Protein Structure Prediction by Fusion,Bayesian Methods

Purchase

Abstract

Related Content

IRMA Sponsors