Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Amy X. Lu

dblp:243/3022 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-6575-7165ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Language models and text generation · 46% Image recognition and object detection · 20% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 20%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › neural language model
protein language model
0.912025
Protein Language Model Fitness is a Matter of Preference · ICLR 2025
Bioinformatics and computational biology › molecular evolution
fitness prediction
0.912025
Protein Language Model Fitness is a Matter of Preference · ICLR 2025
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein sequence analysis › protein sequence representation
protein language model
0.912025
Protein Language Model Fitness is a Matter of Preference · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation › domain shift
covariate shift
0.412019
The Cells Out of Sample (COOS) dataset and benchmarks for measuring out-of-sample generalization of image classifiers · NeurIPS 2019
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
image classification
0.412019
The Cells Out of Sample (COOS) dataset and benchmarks for measuring out-of-sample generalization of image classifiers · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning
pre-training
0.312025
Protein Language Model Fitness is a Matter of Preference · ICLR 2025
Bioinformatics and computational biology › bioimage informatics › bioimage analysis
microscopy image analysis
0.112019
The Cells Out of Sample (COOS) dataset and benchmarks for measuring out-of-sample generalization of image classifiers · NeurIPS 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

protein language model · 1.7unsupervised finetuning · 0.9unsupervised fine-tuning · 0.9transfer learning · 0.8self-supervised learning · 0.8deep CNN · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Protein Language Model Fitness is a Matter of Preference
abstract
Leveraging billions of years of evolution, scientists have trained protein language models (pLMs) to understand the sequence and structure space of proteins aiding in the design of more functional proteins. Although they have shown ability to improve efficiency in engineering, it remains unclear under what conditions they will succeed or fail. We aim to predict the circumstances in which pLMs can successfully perform zero-shot fitness estimation. Our work demonstrates the trends observed over hundreds of deep mutational scans across multiple different fitness objectives. We find that the likelihood, or abstractly, implicit preference of a certain protein sequence imbued during pretraining is predictive fitness prediction capabilities. Both over-preferred and under-preferred wild type sequences harm performance. Generating a causal link between training data and likelihood, we show a power law tail over what data increases protein likelihood which is tied to training sequence homology. Lastly, proteins of low likelihood can be remedied by unsupervised finetuning. In sum, the zero-shot fitness estimation abilities of pLMs can be predicted by the likelihood of the engineered sequence, thus suggesting when pLMs should be deployed in protein maturation campaigns and a way to improve their performance under circumstances of low likelihood.
Cade W. Gordon, Amy X. Lu, Pieter Abbeel
ICLR2
2022 Discovering molecular features of intrinsically disordered regions by using evolution for contrastive learning
abstract
A major challenge to the characterization of intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs), which are widespread in the proteome, but relatively poorly understood, is the identification of molecular features that mediate functions of these regions, such as short motifs, amino acid repeats and physicochemical properties. Here, we introduce a proteome-scale feature discovery approach for IDRs. Our approach, which we call "reverse homology", exploits the principle that important functional features are conserved over evolution. We use this as a contrastive learning signal for deep learning: given a set of homologous IDRs, the neural network has to correctly choose a held-out homolog from another set of IDRs sampled randomly from the proteome. We pair reverse homology with a simple architecture and standard interpretation techniques, and show that the network learns conserved features of IDRs that can be interpreted as motifs, repeats, or bulk features like charge or amino acid propensities. We also show that our model can be used to produce visualizations of what residues and regions are most important to IDR function, generating hypotheses for uncharacterized IDRs. Our results suggest that feature discovery using unsupervised neural networks is a promising avenue to gain systematic insight into poorly understood protein sequences.
Alex Lu 0002, Amy X. Lu, Iva Pritisanac, Taraneh Zarin, Julie D. Forman-Kay, Alan M. Moses
PLoS Comput. Biol.2
2019 The Cells Out of Sample (COOS) dataset and benchmarks for measuring out-of-sample generalization of image classifiers
abstract
Understanding if classifiers generalize to out-of-sample datasets is a central problem in machine learning. Microscopy images provide a standardized way to measure the generalization capacity of image classifiers, as we can image the same classes of objects under increasingly divergent, but controlled factors of variation. We created a public dataset of 132,209 images of mouse cells, COOS-7 (Cells Out Of Sample 7-Class). COOS-7 provides a classification setting where four test datasets have increasing degrees of covariate shift: some images are random subsets of the training data, while others are from experiments reproduced months later and imaged by different instruments. We benchmarked a range of classification models using different representations, including transferred neural network features, end-to-end classification with a supervised deep CNN, and features from a self-supervised CNN. While most classifiers perform well on test datasets similar to the training dataset, all classifiers failed to generalize their performance to datasets with greater covariate shifts. These baselines highlight the challenges of covariate shifts in image data, and establish metrics for improving the generalization capacity of image classifiers.
Alex Lu 0002, Amy X. Lu, Wiebke Schormann, Marzyeh Ghassemi, David W. Andrews, Alan M. Moses
NeurIPS2