Using the Fisher kernel method to detect remote protein homologies

Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology, ISMB 1999

Volumn , Issue , 1999, Pages 149-158

  Jaakkola, Tommi ^a   Diekhans, Mark ^a   Haussler, David ^a  

^a Santa Cruz   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HIDDEN MARKOV MODELS; PROTEINS;

BIOSEQUENCES; DISCRIMINATIVE METHODS; FISHER KERNELS; GENERATIVE MODEL; HIDDEN-MARKOV MODELS; KERNEL FUNCTION; KERNEL-METHODS; PROTEIN DOMAINS; PROTEINS HOMOLOGY; SUPPORT VECTORS MACHINE;

SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES;

GUANINE NUCLEOTIDE BINDING PROTEIN; PROTEIN;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FACTUAL DATABASE; METHODOLOGY; PROBABILITY; PROTEIN TERTIARY STRUCTURE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

DATABASES, FACTUAL; GTP-BINDING PROTEINS; MARKOV CHAINS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, TERTIARY; PROTEINS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, PROTEIN; SOFTWARE;

EID: 0033289037     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (36)

1. Althschul, S.. and Gish. W. 1996. Local alignment statistics. Methods Enzymol. 266:460-480.
2. Altschul, S.; Madden, T.; Schaffer, A.; Zhang, J.; Zhang. Z.; Miller. W.: and Lipman, D. 1997. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs. NAR 25:3899-3402.
3. Altshul, S. F.; Gish, W.; Miller, W.; W., M. E.; and J., L. D. 1990. Basic local alignment search tool. JMB 215:403-410.
4. Baldi, P.; Chauvin, Y.; Hunkapillar. T.; and McClure, M. 1994. Hidden Markov models of biological primary sequence information. PNAS 91:1059-1063.
5. Barrett. C; Hughey, R.; and Karplus, K. 1997. Scoring hidden Markov models. CABIOS 13(2):191-199.
6. Brenner, S. E. 1996. Molecular propinquity: evolutionary and structural relationships of proteins. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Cambridge. Cambridge. England.
7. Bystroff, C, and Baker. D. 1997. Blind predictions of local protein structure in ca.sp2 targets using the i-sites library. Proteins: Structure, Functioii and Genetics. Suppl. 1:167-171.
8. Dubchak, I.; Muclmik, I.; Holbrook, S.; and Kim, S. 1995. Prediction of protein folding class using global description of amino acid sequence, pans 92:8700-8704.
9. Dubchak, I. Muchnik, I. and Kim, S.-W. 1997. Protain folding class prodicton for scop: Approacn based on global descriptors. In Proceedings, 5th International Conference on Intelligent. Systems for Molecular Biology.. 104-108.
10. Durbin, R.; Eddy, S.; Krogh, A.; and Mitchison, G. 1998. Biological Sequence Analysis: Probabilistic Models of Proteins and Nucleic Acids. Cambridge University Press.
11. Eddy. S. HMMER WWW site. http://hmmer.wustl.edu/.
12. Eddy, S.; Mitchison. G.; and Durbin, R. 1995. Maximum discrimination hidden Markov models of sequence consensus. J. Comput. Biol. 2:9-23.
13. Eddy, S. 1995. Multiple alignment using hidden Markov models. In Railings. C, et al., eds., ISMB-95, 114-120. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI/MIT Press.
14. Eddy, S. 1997. Hidden markov models and large-scale genome analysis. Transactions of the American Crystallography. Association. From a talk on HMMER and Pfam given at the 1997 ACA annual meeting in St. Louis.
15. Gish, W., and States, D. J. 1993. Identification of protein coding regions by database similarity search. Nature. Genetics 3.
16. Gribskov, M.; McLachlan, A. D.; and Eisenberg, D. 1987. Profile analysis: Detection of distantly related proteins. PNAS 84:4355-4358.
17. Grundy, W. N. 1998. Family-based homology detection via pairwise sequence comparison. In Int. Conf. Computational Molecular Biology (RECOMB-98). New York: ACM Press.
18. Henikoff, S., and Henikoff, J. G. 1994. Position-based sequence weights. JMB 243(4):574-578.
19. Hubbard, T.; Murzin, A.; Brenner, S.; and Chothia, C. 1997. SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database. NAR 25(l):236-9.
20. Hughey, R., and Krogh, A. 1995. SAM: Sequence alignment and modeling software system. Technical Report UCSC-CRL-95-7. University of California, Santa Cruz, Computer Engineering, UC Santa Cruz, CA 95064.
21. Hughey, R., and Krogh, A. 1996. Hidden Markov-models for sequence analysis: Extension and analysis of the basic method. CABIOS 12(2):95-107. Information on obtaining SAM is available at http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/research/compbio/sam.html.
22. Jaakkola T., and Haussler, D. 1998. Exploring gen erative models in disorininative classifiers. In Advances in Neural Informatior. Processing Systers Jl San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kauffmann Publishers. to appear.
23. Jaakkola, T.; Diekhans, M.; and Haussler, D. 1998a. Data set for a discriminative framework for detecting remote protein homologies. http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/research/compbio/discriminative/fisher-scop-data.tar.gz.
24. Jaakkola, T.; Diekhans, M.; and Haussler, D. 1998b. A discriminative framework for detecting remote protein homologies. Unpublished, available from http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/research/compbio/research.html.
25. Karchin, R.. and Hughey, R. 1998. Weighting hidden Markov models for maximum discrimination. Bioinformatics to appear.
26. Karplus, K.; Barrett, C; and Hughey, R. 1998. Hidden markov models for detecting remote protein homologies. Bioinformatics 14(10):846-856.
27. Karplus, K.; Kimmen Sjolander; Barrett, C; Cline, M.; Haussler, D.; Hughey, R.; Holm, L.; and Sander, C. 1997. Predicting protein structure using hidden Markov models. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics Suppl. 1:134-139.
28. Krogh. A.; Brown. M.: Mian. I. S.; Sj$oUlander, K.; and Haussler, D. 1994. Hidden Markov models in computational biology: Applications to protein modeling. JMB 235:1501-1531.
29. Linial, M.; Linial, X.; Tishby, N.; and Yona, G. 1997. Global self-organization of all known protein sequences reveals inherent biological signatures, jmb 268(2):539-556.
30. Mamitsuka, H. 1996. A learning method of hidden markov models for sequence discrimination. Journal of Computational Biology 3(3):361-373.
31. Nemvald, A.; Liu, J.; Lipman. D.: and Lawrence, C. E. 1997. Extracting protein alignment models from the sequence database. NAR 25:1065-1677.
32. Park, J.; Karplus, K.; Barrett, C; Hughey, R.; Haussler, D.: Hubbard, T.; and Chothia, C. 1998. Sequence comparisons using multiple sequences detect twice as many remote hornologues as pairwise methods..1MB 284(4):1201-1210. Paper available at http://www,mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/genomes/jong/assess_paper/assess_paperNov. html.
33. Pearson, W., and Lipman. D. 1988. Improved tools for biolog'cal sequence comparison. PNAS 85:2441-2448.
34. Rabmer, L. R., and Juang, B. H. 1986. An introduc tion to hidden Markov models. IEEE ASSP Magazine 3(1):4-16.
35. Taylor, W. 1986. Identification of protein sequence homology by consensus template alignment. JMB 188:233-258.
36. WU-BLAST WWW archives. http://blast.wustl.edu/.