Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Wen-Feng Zeng
dblp:169/3991
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2
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
2 papers |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology › proteomics › peptide sequencing
de novo peptide sequencing |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | pNovo 3: precise de novo peptide sequencing using a learning-to-rank framework · Bioinform. 2019 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology
proteomics |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | pNovo 3: precise de novo peptide sequencing using a learning-to-rank framework · Bioinform. 2019 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › proteomics › proteogenomics
novel peptide identification |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | A note on the false discovery rate of novel peptides in proteogenomics · Bioinform. 2015 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › proteomics
proteogenomics |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | A note on the false discovery rate of novel peptides in proteogenomics · Bioinform. 2015 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › biostatistics › statistical bioinformatics
statistical genomics |
0.2 | 1 | 2015 | A note on the false discovery rate of novel peptides in proteogenomics · Bioinform. 2015 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
learning to rank · 0.4deep learning · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | pNovo 3: precise de novo peptide sequencing using a learning-to-rank frameworkabstractMOTIVATION: De novo peptide sequencing based on tandem mass spectrometry data is the key technology of shotgun proteomics for identifying peptides without any database and assembling unknown proteins. However, owing to the low ion coverage in tandem mass spectra, the order of certain consecutive amino acids cannot be determined if all of their supporting fragment ions are missing, which results in the low precision of de novo sequencing. RESULTS: In order to solve this problem, we developed pNovo 3, which used a learning-to-rank framework to distinguish similar peptide candidates for each spectrum. Three metrics for measuring the similarity between each experimental spectrum and its corresponding theoretical spectrum were used as important features, in which the theoretical spectra can be precisely predicted by the pDeep algorithm using deep learning. On seven benchmark datasets from six diverse species, pNovo 3 recalled 29-102% more correct spectra, and the precision was 11-89% higher than three other state-of-the-art de novo sequencing algorithms. Furthermore, compared with the newly developed DeepNovo, which also used the deep learning approach, pNovo 3 still identified 21-50% more spectra on the nine datasets used in the study of DeepNovo. In summary, the deep learning and learning-to-rank techniques implemented in pNovo 3 significantly improve the precision of de novo sequencing, and such machine learning framework is worth extending to other related research fields to distinguish the similar sequences. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: pNovo 3 can be freely downloaded from http://pfind.ict.ac.cn/software/pNovo/index.html. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. Hao Chi, Wen-Feng Zeng, Wen-Jing Zhou, Simin He 0001 |
Bioinform. | 3 |
| 2015 | A note on the false discovery rate of novel peptides in proteogenomicsabstractMOTIVATION: Proteogenomics has been well accepted as a tool to discover novel genes. In most conventional proteogenomic studies, a global false discovery rate is used to filter out false positives for identifying credible novel peptides. However, it has been found that the actual level of false positives in novel peptides is often out of control and behaves differently for different genomes. RESULTS: To quantitatively model this problem, we theoretically analyze the subgroup false discovery rates of annotated and novel peptides. Our analysis shows that the annotation completeness ratio of a genome is the dominant factor influencing the subgroup FDR of novel peptides. Experimental results on two real datasets of Escherichia coli and Mycobacterium tuberculosis support our conjecture. CONTACT: [email protected] or [email protected] or [email protected] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. Wen-Feng Zeng, Hao Chi, Yan-Chang Li, Simin He 0001 |
Bioinform. | 3 |