Protein secondary structure prediction using nearest-neighbor methods.
We have studied the use of nearest-neighbor classifiers to predict the secondary structure of proteins. The nearest-neighbor rule states that a test instance is classified according to the classifications of "nearby" training examples from a database of known structures. In the context of secondary structure prediction, the test instances are windows of n consecutive residues, and the label is the secondary structure type (alpha-helix, beta-strand, or coil) of the center position of the window. To define the neighborhood of a test instance, we employed a novel similarity metric based on the local structural environment scoring scheme of Bowie et al. In this manner, we have attempted to exploit the underlying structural similarity between segments of different proteins to aid in the prediction of secondary structure. Furthermore, in addition to using neighborhoods of fixed radius, we explored a modification of the standard nearest-neighbor algorithm that involved defining an "effective radius" for each exemplar by measuring its performance on a training set. Using these ideas, we achieved a peak prediction accuracy of 68%. Finally, we sought to improve the biological utility of secondary structure prediction by identifying the subset of the predictions that are most likely to be correct. Toward this end, we developed a nearest-neighbor estimator that produced not the traditional "one-state" prediction (alpha-helix, beta-strand, or coil) but rather a probability distribution over the three states. It should be emphasized that this scheme estimates true probability values and that the resulting numbers are not pseudo-probability scores generated by simple normalization of the raw output of the predictor. Applying the mutual information statistic, we found that these probability triplets possess 58% more information than the one-state predictions. Furthermore, the probability estimates allow one to assign an a priori confidence level to the prediction at each residue. Using this approach, we found that the top 28% of the predictions were 86% accurate and the top 43% of the predictions were 81% accurate. These results indicate that, notwithstanding the limitations on overall accuracy of secondary structure prediction, a substantial proportion of a protein can be predicted with considerable accuracy.
Yi
T M
TM
Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, Cambridge, MA.
Lander
E S
ES
D000465:Algorithms; D001185:Artificial Intelligence; D016208:Databases, Factual; D008956:Models, Chemical; D016571:Neural Networks, Computer; D011336:Probability; D017433:Protein Structure, Secondary; D015203:Reproducibility of Results