Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
A variety of methods have been proposed for structure similarity calculation, which are called structure alignment or superposition. One major shortcoming in current structure alignment algorithms is in their inherent design, which is based on local structure similarity. In this work, we propose a method to incorporate global information in obtaining optimal alignments and superpositions. Our method, when applied to optimizing the TM-score and the GDT score, produces significantly better results than current state-of-the-art protein structure alignment tools. Specifically, if the highest TM-score found by TMalign is lower than 0.6 and the highest TM-score found by one of the tested methods is higher than 0.5, there is a probability of 42% that TMalign failed to find TM-scores higher than 0.5, while the same probability is reduced to 2% if our method is used. This could significantly improve the accuracy of fold detection if the cutoff TM-score of 0.5 is used. In addition, existing structure alignment algorithms focus on structure similarity alone and simply ignore other important similarities, such as sequence similarity. Our approach has the capacity to incorporate multiple similarities into the scoring function. Results show that sequence similarity aids in finding high quality protein structure alignments that are more consistent with eye-examined alignments in HOMSTRAD. Even when structure similarity itself fails to find alignments with any consistency with eye-examined alignments, our method remains capable of finding alignments highly similar to, or even identical to, eye-examined alignments. © 2013 Springer-Verlag. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2013 | 10.1007/978-3-642-40453-5_3 | WABI |
Field | DocType | Volume |
Superposition principle,Structural alignment,Combinatorics,Computer science,Global information,Cutoff,Local structure,Bioinformatics,Protein structure | Conference | 8126 LNBI |
Issue | ISSN | Citations |
null | 16113349 | 5 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.52 | 16 | 4 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Xuefeng Cui | 1 | 24 | 5.98 |
| Shuai Cheng Li | 2 | 184 | 30.25 |
| Dongbo Bu | 3 | 157 | 21.54 |
| Ming Li | 4 | 5595 | 829.00 |