Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
John Howard Parish
dblp:56/915
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2003
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
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.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology
g-protein coupled receptor |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Automated generation and refinement of protein signatures: case study with G-protein coupled receptors · Bioinform. 2003 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein function prediction › protein classification
protein family classification |
0.0 | 1 | 2003 | Automated generation and refinement of protein signatures: case study with G-protein coupled receptors · Bioinform. 2003 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
secondary structure prediction · 0.0hidden markov model · 0.0genetic algorithm · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | Automated generation and refinement of protein signatures: case study with G-protein coupled receptorsabstractAbstract Motivation: Previous work had established that it was possible to derive sparse signatures (essentially sequence-length motifs) by examining points of contact between residues in proteins of known three-dimensional (3D) structure. Many interesting protein families have very little tertiary structural information. Methods for deriving signatures using only primary and secondary-structural information were therefore developed. Results: Two methods for deriving protein signatures using protein sequence information and predicted secondary structures are described. One method is based on a scoring approach, the other on the Genetic Algorithm (GA). The effectiveness of the method was tested on the superfamily of GPCRs and compared with the established hidden Markov model (HMM) method. The signature method is shown to perform well, detecting 68% of superfamily members before the first false positive sequence and detecting several distant relationships. The GA population was used to provide information on alignment regions of particular importance for selection of key residues. Contact: [email protected] Supplementary information: Software developed for this project and further data are available online (http://bbsrc-bioinf.leeds.ac.uk/BIOINF/jhp/) * To whom correspondence should be addressed. Michael I. Sadowski, John Howard Parish |
Bioinform. | 2 |