| General information | |||||||||||||||||
| Accession Number | PCB00004 | ||||||||||||||||
| Record Name | SCOP95_Fold_5fold; | ||||||||||||||||
| Created | 12-DEC-2006 | ||||||||||||||||
| Updated | 12-DEC-2006 | ||||||||||||||||
| Description | Classification of protein domain sequences and structures into folds, based on 5-fold crossvalidation (SCOP95 v.169) | ||||||||||||||||
| Data | |||||||||||||||||
| Data Description | Protein sequences and structures from SCOP (< 95% sequence identity) | ||||||||||||||||
| Download | click here for the fasta file containing the sequences SCOP95.fasta | ||||||||||||||||
| Download | click here for the ziped file containing the structures SCOP95.pdb.tar.gz | ||||||||||||||||
| Subdivision into training and test groups | |||||||||||||||||
| Subdivision Description | 58 folds were subdivided into 5 classification tasks to give a total of 290 classification tasks. | ||||||||||||||||
| Positive Set | Folds, randomly subdivided into 5 equal groups | ||||||||||||||||
| Negative Set | The rest of the database outside the fold randomly subdivided into 5 equal groups | ||||||||||||||||
| Statistics | Number of tasks | 290 | |||||||||||||||
| Min | Max | Average | |||||||||||||||
| Positive Train | 12 | 815 | 414 | ||||||||||||||
| Positive Test | 3 | 204 | 104 | ||||||||||||||
| Negative Train | 8740 | 9543 | 9142 | ||||||||||||||
| Negative test | 2185 | 2386 | 2286 | ||||||||||||||
| Full statistics | click here to download the full statistics file SCOP95_fold_supfam_kfold_4.stats or click view to view the file in a WEB layout | ||||||||||||||||
| Cast Matrix | click here to download the cast matrix SCOP95_fold_supfam_kfold_4.cast | ||||||||||||||||
| Distance Matrix | |||||||||||||||||
| Blast | download matrix file SCOP95_BLAST.dmx | ||||||||||||||||
| Smith-Waterman | download matrix file SCOP95_SW.dmx | ||||||||||||||||
| Needleman-Wunsch | download matrix file SCOP95_NW.dmx | ||||||||||||||||
| Local Alignment Kernel | download matrix file SCOP95_LA.dmx | ||||||||||||||||
| Pride structure similarity | download matrix file SCOP95_PRIDE.dmx | ||||||||||||||||
| Results | |||||||||||||||||
| Summary |
Average AUC values for the 290 classification tasks in this record (benchmark test) |
||||||||||||||||
| Detailed view | |||||||||||||||||
| Methods Used | |||||||||||||||||
| [1] SCOP Sequences | The sequences were taken from the SCOP database 1.69 (Andreeva, et al., 2004). The entries of the SCOP95 (<95% identity) were downloaded from the ASTRAL site http://astral.berkeley.edu/site. The 121 non-contiguous domains were discarded and 11944 entries were retained. The sequences were stored in concatenated FASTA format. Andreeva, A., Howorth, D., Brenner, S.E., Hubbard, T.J., Chothia, C. and Murzin, A.G. (2004) SCOP database in 2004: refinements integrate structure and sequence family data, Nucleic Acids Res, 32, D226-229. |
||||||||||||||||
| [2] SCOP Structures | The 3D structures were taken from the SCOP database 1.69 (Andreeva, et al., 2004). The entries of the SCOP95 (<95% identity) were downloaded from the ASTRAL site http://astral.berkeley.edu/pdbstyle-1.69.html site. The 121 non-contiguous domains were discarded and 11944 entries were retained. The structures were deposited as compressed archive. Andreeva, A., Howorth, D., Brenner, S.E., Hubbard, T.J., Chothia, C. and Murzin, A.G. (2004) SCOP database in 2004: refinements integrate structure and sequence family data, Nucleic Acids Res, 32, D226-229. |
||||||||||||||||
| [3] BLAST distance matrix. | An all against all comparison was carried out using BLAST (Altschul, et al., 1990) version 2.2.13 downloaded from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/BLAST/download.shtml The BLOSUM62 matrix was used with a gap opening penalty of 11 and a gap extension penalty of 1 (default parameters). The results were stored in a compressed, tab-delimited ASCII file. Altschul, S.F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E.W. and Lipman, D.J. (1990) Basic local alignment search tool, J Mol Biol, 215, 403-410. |
||||||||||||||||
| [4] Smith-Waterman | An all against all comparison was carried out using the Smith-Waterman algorithm (Smith and Waterman, 1981) as implemented in the water program of EMBOSS (Rice, et al., 2000). The program was downloaded from ftp://ftp.bioinformatics.org/pub/biobrew/. The BLOSUM62 matrix was used with a gap opening penalty of 10 and a gap extension penalty of 0.5 (default parameters). The results were stored in a compressed, tab-delimited ASCII file. Smith, T.F. and Waterman, M.S. (1981) Identification of common molecular subsequences, J. Mol. Biol., 147, 195-197. Rice, P., Longden, I. and Bleasby, A. (2000) EMBOSS: the European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite, Trends Genet, 16, 276-277. |
||||||||||||||||
| [5] Needleman-Wunsch | An all against all comparision was carried out using the Needleman-Wunsch algorithm (Needleman and Wunsch, 1970) as implemented in the needle program of EMBOSS (Rice, et al., 2000). The program was downloaded from ftp://ftp.bioinformatics.org/pub/biobrew/. The BLOSUM62 matrix was used with a gap opening penalty of 10 and a gap extension penalty of 0.5 (default). The results were stored in a compressed, tab-delimited ASCII file. Needleman, S.B. and Wunsch, C.D. (1970) A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins, J Mol Biol, 48, 443-453. Rice, P., Longden, I. and Bleasby, A. (2000) EMBOSS: the European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite, Trends Genet, 16, 276-277. |
||||||||||||||||
| [6] Local Alignment kernel | The Local Alignment Kernel program version 0.3 of Saigo and associates (Saigo, et al., 2004) was downloaded from http://cg.ensmp.fr/~vert/. The following run parameters were used: Default comparison matrix found in the parameters.h file. Gap opening penalty = 11 (default), Gap extension penalty = 1 (default), Scaling parameter = 0.5. Saigo, H., Vert, J.P., Ueda, N. and Akutsu, T. (2004) Protein homology detection using string alignment kernels, Bioinformatics, 20, 1682-1689. |
||||||||||||||||
| [7] PRIDE | An all against all comparison was carried out using the PRIDE algorithm (Gaspari, et al., 2005). The program was provided by Z. Gaspari. Gaspari, Z., Vlahovicek, K. and Pongor, S. (2005) Efficient recognition of folds in protein 3D structures by the improved PRIDE algorithm, Bioinformatics, 21, 3322-3323. |
||||||||||||||||
| [8] Nearest negihbour classification | Nearest neighbour (1NN) classification is a technique whereby a query sequence is assigned to the a priori known class of the database entry that was found most similar to it in terms of a distance/similarity measure (for an introduction see Duda, et al., 2001). Duda, R.O., Hart, P.E. and Stork, D.G. (2000) Pattern Classification. John Wiley & Sons, New York. |
||||||||||||||||
| [9] Performance Evaluation | The evaluation of classification performance was carried out by the standard receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis (for an introduction see (Duda, et al., 2000)). This method is designed to test the ranking ability of a given classifier based on a real-valued ranking parameter. In the case of nearest neighbour classification, the ranking parameter was a similarity/distance parameter calculated between an object and the nearest member of the positive training set (outlier detection). Briefly, the analysis is carried out by plotting sensitivity vs 1-specificity at various threshold values, then the resulting curve is integrated to give an “area under curve” or AUC value. These values are determined for each classification experiment. For a perfect ranking, AUC=1.0, for random ranking AUC=0.5 (Egan, 1975). Duda, R.O., Hart, P.E. and Stork, D.G. (2000) Pattern Classification. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Egan, J.P. (1975) Signal Detection theory and ROC Analysis. New York. |
||||||||||||||||