TopologyNet: Topology based deep convolutional and multi-task neural networks for biomolecular property predictions

Abstract

Although deep learning approaches have had tremendous success in image, video and audio processing, computer vision, and speech recognition, their applications to three-dimensional (3D) biomolecular structural data sets have been hindered by the geometric and biological complexity. To address this problem we introduce the element-specific persistent homology (ESPH) method. ESPH represents 3D complex geometry by one-dimensional (1D) topological invariants and retains important biological information via a multichannel image-like representation. This representation reveals hidden structure-function relationships in biomolecules. We further integrate ESPH and deep convolutional neural networks to construct a multichannel topological neural network (TopologyNet) for the predictions of protein-ligand binding affinities and protein stability changes upon mutation. To overcome the deep learning limitations from small and noisy training sets, we propose a multi-task multichannel topological convolutional neural network (MM-TCNN). We demonstrate that TopologyNet outperforms the latest methods in the prediction of protein-ligand binding affinities, mutation induced globular protein folding free energy changes, and mutation induced membrane protein folding free energy changes. AVAILABILITY: weilab.math.msu.edu/TDL/.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 107

1. 1.

   Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Hinton GE. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In: Advances in neural information processing systems; 2012. p. 1097–1105.

   Not in our library

2. 2.

   Simonyan K, Zisserman A. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:14091556. 2014;.

   Not in our library

3. 3.
   Deep learning · 2015

   No notice
4. 4.

   Ngiam J, Khosla A, Kim M, Nam J, Lee H, Ng AY. Multimodal deep learning. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on machine learning (ICML-11); 2011. p. 689–696.

   Not in our library

5. 5.

   Caruana R. Multitask learning In: Learning to learn. Springer; 1998 p. 95–133.

   Not in our library

6. 6.

   Evgeniou T, Pontil M. Regularized multi–task learning. In: Proceedings of the tenth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM; 2004. p. 109–117.

   Not in our library

7. 7.

   Evgeniou A, Pontil M. Multi-task feature learning. Advances in neural information processing systems. 2007;19:41.

   Not in our library

8. 8.

   Liu J, Ji S, Ye J. Multi-task feature learning via efficient l 2, 1-norm minimization. In: Proceedings of the twenty-fifth conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence. AUAI Press; 2009. p. 339–348.

   Not in our library

9. 9.

   Zhou J, Chen J, Ye J. Clustered multi-task learning via alternating structure optimization. In: Advances in neural information processing systems; 2011. p. 702–710.

   Not in our library

10. 10.

    Unterthiner T, Mayr A, Klambauer G, Hochreiter S. Toxicity prediction using deep learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:150301445. 2015;.

    Not in our library

11. 11.

    Lusci A, Pollastri G, Baldi P. Deep architectures and deep learning in chemoinformatics: the prediction of aqueous solubility for drug-like molecules. Journal of chemical information and modeling. 2013;53(7):1563–1575.

    Not in our library10.1021/ci400187y

12. 12.

    Wallach I, Dzamba M, Heifets A. AtomNet: A Deep Convolutional Neural Network for Bioactivity Prediction in Structure-based Drug Discovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:151002855. 2015;.

    Not in our library

13. 13.

    Dahl GE, Jaitly N, Salakhutdinov R. Multi-task neural networks for QSAR predictions. arXiv preprint arXiv:14061231. 2014;.

    Not in our library

14. 14.

    Wang B, Zhao Z, Wei GW. Automatic parametrization of non-polar implicit solvent models for the blind prediction of solvation free energies. Journal of Chemical Physics. 2016;145:124110

    Not in our library10.1063/1.4963193

15. 15.

    Nguyen DD, Wei GW. The impact of surface area, volume, curvature and Lennard-Jones potential to solvation modeling. Journal of Computational Chemistry. 2017; 38:24–36.

    Not in our library10.1002/jcc.24512

16. 16.

    Feng X, Xia K, Tong Y, Wei GW. Geometric modeling of subcellular structures, organelles and large multiprotein complexes. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering. 2012;28:1198–1223.

    Not in our library10.1002/cnm.2532

17. 17.

    Schlick T, Olson WK. Trefoil knotting revealed by molecular dynamics simulations of supercoiled DNA. Science. 1992;257(5073):1110–1115.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.257.5073.1110

18. 18.

    Zomorodian A, Carlsson G. Computing persistent homology. Discrete Comput Geom. 2005;33:249–274.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00454-004-1146-y

19. 19.

    Sumners DW. Knot theory and DNA. In: Proceedings of Symposia in Applied Mathematics. vol. 45; 1992. p. 39–72.

    Not in our library

20. 20.

    Darcy IK, Vazquez M. Determining the topology of stable protein-DNA complexes. Biochemical Society Transactions. 2013;41:601–605.

    Not in our library10.1042/bst20130004

21. 21.

    Heitsch C, Poznanovic S. Combinatorial insights into RNA secondary structure, in Jonoska N. and Saito M., editors. Discrete and Topological Models in Molecular Biology. 2014;Chapter 7:145–166.

    Not in our library10.1007/978-3-642-40193-0_7

22. 22.

    Demerdash ONA, Daily MD, Mitchell JC. Structure-Based Predictive Models for Allosteric Hot Spots. PLOS Computational Biology. 2009;5:e1000531

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000531

23. 23.

    DasGupta B, Liang J. Models and Algorithms for Biomolecules and Molecular Networks. John Wiley & Sons; 2016.

    Not in our library

24. 24.

    Shi X, Koehl P. Geometry and topology for modeling biomolecular surfaces. Far East J Applied Math. 2011;50:1–34.

    Not in our library

25. 25.

    Kaczynski T, Mischaikow K, Mrozek M. Computational Homology vol. 157 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2004.

    Not in our library

26. 26.

    Frosini P. A distance for similarity classes of submanifolds of a Euclidean space. BUllentin of Australian Mathematical Society. 1990;42(3):407–416.

    Not in our library10.1017/s0004972700028574

27. 27.

    Robins V. Towards computing homology from finite approximations. In: Topology Proceedings. vol. 24; 1999. p. 503–532.

    Not in our library

28. 28.

    Edelsbrunner H, Letscher D, Zomorodian A. Topological persistence and simplification. Discrete Comput Geom. 2002;28:511–533.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00454-002-2885-2

29. 29.

    Bendich P, Harer J. Persistent Intersection Homology. Foundations of Computational Mathematics (FOCM). 2011;11(3):305–336.

    Not in our library10.1007/s10208-010-9081-1

30. 30.

    Cohen-Steiner D, Edelsbrunner H, Harer J. Stability of Persistence Diagrams. Discrete & Computational Geometry. 2007;37(1):103–120.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00454-006-1276-5

31. 31.

    Cohen-Steiner D, Edelsbrunner H, Harer J. Extending Persistence Using Poincaré and Lefschetz Duality. Foundations of Computational Mathematics. 2009;9(1):79–103.

    Not in our library10.1007/s10208-008-9038-9

32. 32.

    Cohen-Steiner D, Edelsbrunner H, Harer J, Morozov D. Persistent Homology for Kernels, Images, and Cokernels. In: Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. SODA 09; 2009. p. 1011–1020.

    Not in our library

33. 33.

    Chazal F, Cohen-Steiner D, Glisse M, Guibas LJ, Oudot S. Proximity of persistence modules and their diagrams. In: Proc. 25th ACM Sympos. on Comput. Geom.; 2009. p. 237–246.

    Not in our library

34. 34.

    Chazal F, Guibas LJ, Oudot SY, Skraba P. Persistence-based clustering in riemannian manifolds. In: Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on Computational geometry. SoCG’11; 2011. p. 97–106.

    Not in our library

35. 35.

    Carlsson G, Zomorodian A. The theory of multidimensional persistence. Discrete Computational Geometry. 2009;42(1):71–93.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00454-009-9176-0

36. 36.

    Carlsson G, de Silva V, Morozov D. Zigzag persistent homology and real-valued functions. In: Proc. 25th Annu. ACM Sympos. Comput. Geom.; 2009. p. 247–256.

    Not in our library

37. 37.

    de Silva V, Morozov D, Vejdemo-Johansson M. Persistent cohomology and circular coordinates. Discrete and Comput Geom. 2011;45:737–759.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00454-011-9344-x

38. 38.

    Oudot SY, Sheehy DR. Zigzag Zoology: Rips Zigzags for Homology Inference. In: Proc. 29th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry; 2013. p. 387–396.

    Not in our library

39. 39.

    Dey TK, Fan F, Wang Y. Computing topological persistence for simplicial maps. In: Proc. 30th Annu. Sympos. Comput. Geom. (SoCG); 2014. p. 345–354.

    Not in our library

40. 40.

    Mischaikow K, Nanda V. Morse Theory for Filtrations and Efficient Computation of Persistent Homology. Discrete and Computational Geometry. 2013;50(2):330–353.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00454-013-9529-6

41. 41.

    Tausz A, Vejdemo-Johansson M, Adams H. JavaPlex: A research software package for persistent (co)homology; 2011. Software available at http://code.google.com/p/javaplex.

    Not in our library

42. 42.

    Nanda V. Perseus: the persistent homology software;. Software available at http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~vnanda/perseus.

    Not in our library

43. 43.

    Bauer U, Kerber M, Reininghaus J. Distributed computation of persistent homology. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX). 2014;.

    Not in our library

44. 44.

    Carlsson G, Zomorodian A, Collins A, Guibas LJ. Persistence Barcodes for Shapes. International Journal of Shape Modeling. 2005;11(2):149–187.

    Not in our library10.1142/s0218654305000761

45. 45.

    Ghrist R. Barcodes: The persistent topology of data. Bull Amer Math Soc. 2008;45:61–75.

    Not in our library10.1090/s0273-0979-07-01191-3

46. 46.

    Kasson PM, Zomorodian A, Park S, Singhal N, Guibas LJ, Pande VS. Persistent voids a new structural metric for membrane fusion. Bioinformatics. 2007;23:1753–1759.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btm250

47. 47.

    Gameiro M, Hiraoka Y, Izumi S, Kramar M, Mischaikow K, Nanda V. Topological measurement of protein compressibility via persistence diagrams. Japan Journal of Industrial and Applied Mathematics. 2014;32:1–17.

    Not in our library10.1007/s13160-014-0153-5

48. 48.

    Dabaghian Y, Memoli F, Frank L, Carlsson G. A Topological Paradigm for Hippocampal Spatial Map Formation Using Persistent Homology. PLoS Comput Biol. 2012;8(8):e1002581

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002581

49. 49.

    Xia KL, Wei GW. Persistent homology analysis of protein structure, flexibility and folding. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineerings. 2014;30:814–844.

    Not in our library10.1002/cnm.2655

50. 50.

    Xia KL, Feng X, Tong YY, Wei GW. Persistent Homology for the quantitative prediction of fullerene stability. Journal of Computational Chemsitry. 2015;36:408–422.

    Not in our library10.1002/jcc.23816

51. 51.

    Wang B, Wei GW. Object-oriented Persistent Homology. Journal of Computational Physics. 2016;305:276–299.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jcp.2015.10.036

52. 52.

    Xia KL, Wei GW. Multidimensional persistence in biomolecular data. Journal Computational Chemistry. 2015;36:1502–1520.

    Not in our library10.1002/jcc.23953

53. 53.

    Xia KL, Zhao ZX, Wei GW. Multiresolution persistent homology for excessively large biomolecular datasets. Journal of Chemical Physics. 2015;143:134103

    Not in our library10.1063/1.4931733

54. 54.

    Xia KL, Zhao ZX, Wei GW. Multiresolution topological simplification. Journal Computational Biology. 2015;22:1–5.

    Not in our library10.1089/cmb.2015.0104

55. 55.

    Liu B, Wang B, Zhao R, Tong Y, Wei GW. ESES: software for Eulerian solvent excluded surface. Journal of Computational Chemistry. 2017;38:446–466.

    Not in our library10.1002/jcc.24682

56. 56.

    Xia KL, Wei GW. Persistent topology for cryo-EM data analysis. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering. 2015;31:e02719

    Not in our library10.1002/cnm.2719

57. 57.

    Cang Z, Mu L, Wu K, Opron K, Xia K, Wei GW. A topological approach to protein classification. Molecular based Mathematical Biologys. 2015;3:140–162.

    Not in our library

58. 58.

    Kusano G, Fukumizu CK, Hiraoka Y, TOHOKU A. Persistence weighted Gaussian kernel for topological data analysis. Statistics. 2016;1:1–2.

    Not in our library

59. 59.

    Li H, Leung KS, Wong MH, Ballester PJ. Improving AutoDock Vina using random forest: the growing accuracy of binding affinity prediction by the effective exploitation of larger data sets. Molecular Informatics. 2015;34(2–3):115–126.

    Not in our library10.1002/minf.201400132

60. 60.

    Cang Z, Wei GW. Analysis and prediction of protein folding energy changes upon mutation by element specific persistent homology. Bioinformatics. 2017; Accepted.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btx460

61. 61.

    Cang Z, Wei GW. Integration of element specific persistent homology and machine learning for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering. 2017; Accepted.

    Not in our library10.1002/cnm.2914

62. 62.

    Gilson MK, Zhou HX. Calculation of protein-ligand binding affinities. Annual Review of Biophysics and Biomolecular Structur. 2007;36:21–42.

    Not in our library10.1146/annurev.biophys.36.040306.132550

63. 63.

    Ortiz AR, Pisabarro MT, Gago F, Wade RC. Prediction of Drug Binding Affinities by Comparative Binding Energy Analysis. J Med Chem. 1995;38:2681–2691.

    Not in our library10.1021/jm00014a020

64. 64.

    Yin S, Biedermannova L, Vondrasek J, Dokholyan NV. MedusaScore: An Acurate Force Field-Based Scoring Function for Virtual Drug Screening. Journal of Chemical Information and Model. 2008;48:1656–1662.

    Not in our library10.1021/ci8001167

65. 65.

    Zheng Z, Merz KM Jr. Ligand Identification Scoring Algorithm (LISA). Journal of Chemical Information and Model. 2011;51:1296–1306.

    Not in our library10.1021/ci2000665

66. 66.

    Verkhivker G, Appelt K, Freer ST, Villafranca JE. Empirical free energy calculations of ligand-protein crystallographic complexes. I. Knowledge based ligand-protein interaction potentials applied to the prediction of human immunodeficiency virus protease binding affinity. Protein Eng. 1995;8:677–691.

    Not in our library10.1093/protein/8.7.677

67. 67.

    Eldridge MD, Murray CW, Auton TR, Paolini GV, Mee RP. Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 1997;11:425–445.

    Not in our library10.1023/a:1007996124545

68. 68.

    Wang R, Lai L, Wang S. Further development and validation of empirical scoring functions for structure based binding affinity prediction. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2002;16:11–26.

    Not in our library10.1023/a:1016357811882

69. 69.

    Zheng Z, Ucisik MN, Merz KM Jr. The Movable Type Method Applied to Protein–Ligand Binding. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation. 2013;9:5526–5538.

    Not in our library10.1021/ct4005992

70. 70.

    Muegge I, Martin Y. A general and fast scoring function for protein-ligand interactions: a simplified potential approach. J Med Chem. 1999;42(5):791–804.

    Not in our library10.1021/jm980536j

71. 71.

    Velec HFG, Gohlke H, Klebe G. Knowledge-Based Scoring Function Derived from Small Molecule Crystal Data with Superior Recognition Rate of Near-Native Ligand Poses and Better Affinity Prediction. J Med Chem. 2005;48:6296–6303.

    Not in our library10.1021/jm050436v

72. 72.

    Huang SY, Zou X. An iterative knowledge-based scoring function to predict protein-ligand interactions: I. Derivation of interaction potentials. J Comput Chem. 2006;27:1865–1875.

    Not in our library10.1002/jcc.20504

73. 73.

    Li H, Leung KS, Wong M, Ballester PJ. Substituting random forest for multiple linear regression improves binding affinity prediction of scoring functions: Cyscore as a case study. BMC Bioinformatics. 2014;15(291).

    Not in our library10.1186/1471-2105-15-291

74. 74.

    Kinnings SL, Liu N, Tonge PJ, Jackson RM, Xie L, Bourne PE. A machine learning based method to improve docking scoring functions and its application to drug repurposing. Journal of Chemical Information and Model. 2011;51(2):408–419.

    Not in our library10.1021/ci100369f

75. 75.

    Ashtawy HM, Mahapatra NR. A Comparative Assessment of Ranking Accuracies of Conventional and Machine-Learning-Based Scoring Functions for Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction. IEEE/ACM Transactions on computational biology and bioinformatics. 2012;9(5):1301–1313.

    Not in our library10.1109/tcbb.2012.36

76. 76.

    MacKerell J A D, Bashford D, Bellot M, Dunbrack J R L, Evanseck JD, Field MJ, et al All-Atom Empirical Potential for Molecular Modeling and Dynamics Studies of Proteins. Journal of Physical Chemistry B. 1998;102(18):3586–3616.

    Not in our library10.1021/jp973084f

77. 77.

    Case DA, Berryman JT, Betz RM, Cerutti DS, III TEC, Darden TA, et al. AMBER 2015. University of California, San Francisco. 2015;.

    Not in our library

78. 78.

    Liu Z, Li Y, Han L, Liu J, Zhao Z, Nie W, et al PDB-wide collection of binding data: current status of the PDBbind database. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(3):405–412.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btu626

79. 79.

    Zhang Z, Miteva MA, Wang L, Alexov E. Analyzing effects of naturally occurring missense mutations. Comput Math Methods Med. 2012;2012:805827

    Not in our library10.1155/2012/805827

80. 80.

    Kucukkal TG, Petukh M, Li L, Alexov E. Structural and physico-chemical effects of disease and non-disease nsSNPs on proteins. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2015;32:18–24.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.sbi.2015.01.003

81. 81.

    Puente XS, Sanchez LM, Overall CM, Lopez-Otin C. Human and mouse proteases: a comparative genomic approach. Nat Rev Genet. 2003;4:544–558.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrg1111

82. 82.

    Martinez JL, Baquero F. Mutation Frequencies and Antibiotic Resistance. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. 2000;44:1771–1777.

    Not in our library10.1128/aac.44.7.1771-1777.2000

83. 83.

    Fersht AR. Dissection of the structure and activity of the tyrosyl-tRNA synthetase by site-directed mutagenesis. Biochemistry. 1978;26:8031–8037.

    Not in our library10.1021/bi00399a001

84. 84.

    Guerois R, Nielsen JE, Serrano L. Predicting Changes in the Stability of Proteins and Protein Complexes: A Study of More Than 1000 Mutations. J Mol Biol. 2002;320:369–387.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0022-2836(02)00442-4

85. 85.

    Capriotti E, Fariselli P, Casadio R. I-Mutant2.0: predicting stability changes upon mutation from the protein sequence or structure. Nucleic Acids Research. 2005;33:W306–W310.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gki375

86. 86.

    Dehouck Y, Grosfils A, Folch B, Gilis D, Bogaerts P, Rooman M. Fast and accurate predictions of protein stability changes upon mutations using statistical potentials and neural networks: PoPMuSiC-2.0. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:2537–2543.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btp445

87. 87.

    Getov I, Petukh M, Alexov E. SAAFEC: Predicting the Effect of Single Point Mutations on Protein Folding Free Energy Using a Knowledge-Modified MM/PBSA Approach. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2016;17:512

    Not in our library10.3390/ijms17040512

88. 88.

    Kellogg EH, Leaver-Fay A, Baker D. Role of conformational sampling in computing mutation-induced changes in protein structure and stability. Proteins: Struct, Funct, Genet. 2011;79:830–838.

    Not in our library10.1002/prot.22921

89. 89.

    Worth CL, Preissner R, Blundell TL. SDM-a server for predicting effects of mutations on protein stability and malfunction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:W215–W222.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkr363

90. 90.
    DUET: a server for predicting effects of mutations on protein stability using an integrated computational approach · 2014

    No notice
91. 91.

    Yang Y, Chen B, Tan G, Vihinen M, Shen B. Structure-based prediction of the effects of a missense variant on protein stability. Amino Acids. 2013;44:847–855.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00726-012-1407-7

92. 92.
    Predicting the Functional Effect of Amino Acid Substitutions and Indels · 2012

    No notice
93. 93.
    Combining structural modeling with ensemble machine learning to accurately predict protein fold stability and binding affinity effects upon mutation. · 2014

    Not checked
94. 94.

    Quan L, Lv Q, Zhang Y. STRUM: structure-based prediction of protein stability changes upon single-point mutation. Bioinformatics. 2016;32(19):2936–2946.

    Not in our library10.1093/bioinformatics/btw361

95. 95.

    Folkman L, Stantic B, Sattar A, Zhou Y. EASEMM: Sequence-Based Prediction of Mutation-Induced Stability Changes with Feature-Based Multiple Models. J Mol Biol. 2016;428:1394–1405.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jmb.2016.01.012

96. 96.

    Bava KA, Gromiha MM, Uedaira H, Kitajima K, Sarai A. ProTherm, version 4.0: thermodynamic database for proteins and mutants. Nucleic acids research. 2004;32(suppl 1):D120–D121.

    Not in our library10.1093/nar/gkh082

97. 97.

    Zhou J, Chen J, Ye J. Malsar: Multi-task learning via structural regularization. Arizona State University 2011;.

    Not in our library

98. 98.

    Kroncke BM, Duran AM, Mendenhall JL, Meiler J, Blume JD, Sanders CR. Documentation of an Imperative To Improve Methods for Predicting Membrane Protein Stability. Biochemistry. 2016;55:5002–5009.

    Not in our library10.1021/acs.biochem.6b00537

99. 99.

    Jeffrey GA, Jeffrey GA. An introduction to hydrogen bonding. vol. 12 Oxford university press New York; 1997.

    Not in our library

100. 100.

     Srivastava N, Hinton GE, Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Salakhutdinov R. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. Journal of Machine Learning Research. 2014;15(1):1929–1958.

     Not in our library

101. 101.

     Bergstra J, Yamins D, Cox DD. Making a Science of Model Search: Hyperparameter Optimization in Hundreds of Dimensions for Vision Architectures. ICML (1). 2013;28:115–123.

     Not in our library

102. 102.

     Morozov D. Dionysus library for computing persistent homology; 2012.

     Not in our library

103. 103.

     Damiand G. Combinatorial Maps. In: CGAL User and Reference Manual. 4.0 ed. CGAL Editorial Board; 2012.

     Not in our library

104. 104.

     Tausz A, Vejdemo-Johansson M, Adams H. JavaPlex: A research software package for persistent (co)homology. In: Hong H, Yap C, editors. Proceedings of ICMS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8592; 2014. p. 129–136.

     Not in our library

105. 105.

     Chollet F. Keras; 2015. https://github.com/fchollet/keras.

     Not in our library

106. 106.

     Theano Development Team. Theano: A Python framework for fast computation of mathematical expressions. arXiv e-prints. 2016;abs/1605.02688.

     Not in our library

107. 107.

     Walt Svd, Colbert SC, Varoquaux G. The NumPy array: a structure for efficient numerical computation. Computing in Science & Engineering. 2011;13(2):22–30.

     Not in our library10.1109/mcse.2011.37

Cited by papers we hold 4

• Algebraic graph-assisted bidirectional transformers for molecular property prediction · 2021
  No notice
• Artificial intelligence and machine learning‐aided drug discovery in central nervous system diseases: State‐of‐the‐arts and future directions · 2020
  No notice
• Representability of algebraic topology for biomolecules in machine learning based scoring and virtual screening · 2018
  No notice
• Opportunities and obstacles for deep learning in biology and medicine · 2018
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.