2007
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm527
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Support Vector Machine-based classification of protein folds using the structural properties of amino acid residues and amino acid residue pairs

Abstract: Dataset and stand-alone program are available upon request.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
93
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 96 publications
(96 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
93
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Machine learning methods, such as support vector machine and neural networks, are powerful classifiers which are being used for protein structure prediction and fold prediction problems with features based on amino acid sequence [15]. In this paper, we illustrated classifiers, namely decision tree with the principal objective of gaining understanding of the results generated for each class [19] Figure: 4 shows performance measure, Actual True Positive rate (Recall).…”
Section: Classification Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Machine learning methods, such as support vector machine and neural networks, are powerful classifiers which are being used for protein structure prediction and fold prediction problems with features based on amino acid sequence [15]. In this paper, we illustrated classifiers, namely decision tree with the principal objective of gaining understanding of the results generated for each class [19] Figure: 4 shows performance measure, Actual True Positive rate (Recall).…”
Section: Classification Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A wide range of classification techniques such as, artificial neural networks (ANN) [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], meta classifiers [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], K-nearest neighbors [14], [15], [16], [17], [18] and support vector machines (SVM) [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27] have been used for the PFR. Among the classifiers employed to tackle the PFR, using support vector machine have attained the best results [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]. Similarly, a wide range of features have been extracted and used to tackle the PFR such as, physicochemical-based features [19], [23], [33], [34], sequence-based features [6], [14], [15], [32] evolutionarybased features [18], [25], [28], [30], and structural-based features [17], …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At first, amino acid composition (AAC) was used to predict T3SEs because researchers have detected amino acid composition biases in T3SEs [17]. Later, the approaches based on amino acid pair composition (AAPC) or motif emerged [18], [19]. However, the classification results are not satisfying because no defined consensus motifs or features have been discovered for T3SEs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%