4.2 Article

Computational Modeling of Proteins based on Cellular Automata: A Method of HP Folding Approximation

Journal

PROTEIN JOURNAL
Volume 37, Issue 3, Pages 248-260

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10930-018-9771-0

Keywords

Hydrophobic-hydrophilic model; Folding approximation; Protein folding; Cellular automata; Computational modeling of proteins

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The design of a protein folding approximation algorithm is not straightforward even when a simplified model is used. The folding problem is a combinatorial problem, where approximation and heuristic algorithms are usually used to find near optimal folds of proteins primary structures. Approximation algorithms provide guarantees on the distance to the optimal solution. The folding approximation approach proposed here depends on two-dimensional cellular automata to fold proteins presented in a well-studied simplified model called the hydrophobic-hydrophilic model. Cellular automata are discrete computational models that rely on local rules to produce some overall global behavior. One-third and one-fourth approximation algorithms choose a subset of the hydrophobic amino acids to form H-H contacts. Those algorithms start with finding a point to fold the protein sequence into two sides where one side ignores H's at even positions and the other side ignores H's at odd positions. In addition, blocks or groups of amino acids fold the same way according to a predefined normal form. We intend to improve approximation algorithms by considering all hydrophobic amino acids and folding based on the local neighborhood instead of using normal forms. The CA does not assume a fixed folding point. The proposed approach guarantees one half approximation minus the H-H endpoints. This lower bound guaranteed applies to short sequences only. This is proved as the core and the folds of the protein will have two identical sides for all short sequences.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available