Multi-objective Genetic Programming with Multi-view Multi-level Feature for Enhanced Protein Secondary Structure Prediction
Authors: Yining Qian, Lijie Su, Meiling Xu, Xianpeng Wang
Organizations: National Frontiers Science Center for Industrial Intelligence and Systems Optimization, Shenyang 110819, China · Key Laboratory of Data Analytics and Optimization for Smart Industry (Northeastern University), Ministry of Education, Shenyang 110819, China · Liaoning Engineering Laboratory of Data Analytics and Optimization for Smart Industry, Shenyang 110819, China · Liaoning Key Laboratory of Manufacturing System and Logistics Optimization, Shenyang 110819, China · Liaoning Engineering Laboratory of Data Analytics and Optimization for Smart Industry, Shenyang, 110819, China
Predicting protein secondary structure is essential for understanding protein function and advancing drug discovery. However, the intricate sequence-structure relationship poses significant challenges for accurate modeling. To address these, we propose MOGP-MMF, a multi-objective genetic programming framework that reformulates PSSP as an automated optimization task focused on feature selection and fusion. Specifically, MOGP-MMF introduces a multi-view multi-level representation strategy that integrates evolutionary, semantic, and newly introduced structural views to capture the comprehensive protein folding logic. Leveraging an enriched operator set, the framework evolves both linear and nonlinear fusion functions, effectively capturing high-order feature interactions while reducing fusion complexity. To resolve the accuracy-complexity trade-off, an improved multi-objective GP algorithm is developed, incorporating a knowledge transfer mechanism that utilizes prior evolutionary experience to guide the population toward global optima. Extensive experiments across seven benchmark datasets demonstrate that MOGP-MMF surpasses state-of-the-art methods, particularly in Q8 accuracy and structural integrity. Furthermore, MOGP-MMF generates a diverse set of non-dominated solutions, offering flexible model selection schemes for various practical application scenarios. The source code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/qian-ann/MOGP-MMF/tree/main.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : Crystal structure of chimeric carbonic anhydrase VI bound to ethoxzolamide (PDB ID: 6QL2), illustrating the protein secondary structure prediction.
Fig. 2 : The overall workflow of MOGP-MMF. It involves extracting multi-view features (PSSM, HMM, T5, SaProt), performing evolutionary feature fusion via an enriched operator set and genetic strategies, and finally selecting the optimal program for performance evaluation.
Fig. 3 : Architecture of multi-level feature extractors.
Function
Type
Description
W_Add
linear
Add two weighted features
W_Sub
linear
Subtract two weighted features
Mul
non-linear
Multiply filter
GRT
non-linear
Select maximum value between two features
Sqrt
non-linear
Sqrt an feature
Log
non-linear
Logarithm function
TABLE I : Functions in EOS
Constant
Type
Description
n
Integer
The parameters for the W_Add and W_Sub functions. They are randomly generated in the range of [1,10).
σ
Integer
The convolution kernel size of LoGF is with values ranging from 1 to 4.
FFTmode
Integer
The transform dimension for FFT with possible values of 1.
TABLE II : Ephemeral random constants in EOS
Hyperparameter
Setting
Number of epochs
100
Dropout rate
0.2
Batch size
64
Maximum sequence length
700
Number of labels
8
Kernel size (CNNs)
9
TABLE III : Hyperparameters used in GP-MMF
Dataset
Method
Q8
Precision
Recall
F1-score
MCC
Sov
CB6133
NetSurfP-3.0
0.765
0.771
0.765
0.756
0.711
76.2
AttSec
0.783
0.774
0.783
0.773
0.730
78.9
Mufold-SS
0.711
0.696
0.711
0.685
0.627
71.7
ShuffleNet_SS
0.735
0.723
0.735
0.725
0.667
75.1
DeepACLSTM
0.733
0.720
0.733
0.716
0.662
73.8
2C-BLSTM
0.735
0.720
0.735
0.721
0.665
73.8
TABLE IV : Performance comparison of MOGP-MMF with state-of-the-art methods on benchmark datasets. The best results are highlighted in bold.
Method
Representation
CB6133
CB6133
CB513
CASP10
CASP11
CASP12
CASP13
CASP14
(Validation)
(Test)
Single-view Single-level feature
HMM-CNN1
69.86
70.35
66.91
69.61
68.14
66.47
63.46
61.50
HMM-CNN2
72.11
72.64
69.33
71.39
70.50
46.69
45.70
42.87
HMM-RNN1
72.58
72.99
69.56
70.95
70.59
69.19
66.80
65.33
HMM-RNN2
72.46
72.91
69.37
71.84
70.54
69.68
66.29
65.81
PSSM-CNN1
69.44
69.58
66.33
68.91
66.24
59.70
58.63
59.53
TABLE V : Performance Comparison of MMF and Alternative Feature Configurations (Accuracy in Percentage)
Fig. 4 : Visualization of comparisons between models with and without nonlinear operators on CB6133 dataset: (a) Accuracy comparison under MOGP, (b) Complexity comparison under MOGP.
Method
CB6133
CB6133
CB513
CASP10
CASP11
CASP12
CASP13
CASP14
(Validation)
(Test)
Add
78.00
78.47
74.89
78.55
75.85
73.60
71.39
68.35
Mul
54.61
55.75
50.70
52.11
54.50
50.51
47.49
47.41
Max
77.97
78.25
74.75
78.55
75.62
72.08
69.59
67.79
Min
74.00
74.17
71.09
74.30
71.98
70.25
68.46
66.32
Concatenation
74.88
75.38
71.97
75.62
73.34
70.74
67.44
66.59
TABLE VI : Performance Comparison of MOGP and Alternative Fusion Methods (Accuracy in Percentage)
Fig. 5 : Performance comparisons on the CB6133 dataset. (a-b) Accuracy and complexity of SOGP vs. Naive MOGP. (c-d) Impact of Knowledge Transfer (KT) on MOGP accuracy and complexity.
Fig. 6 : Representative ”anchor” trees from the 200-solution Pareto front (CB6133): (a) Low-Complexity, (b) Balanced, and (c) High-Performance.
Method
Anchor
Complexity
CB6133 (Test)
CB513
CASP10
CASP11
CASP12
CASP13
CASP14
Tree 1
Low-Complexity
15
79.39
75.98
79.76
76.41
68.28
66.15
62.70
Tree 2
Balanced
28
79.91
76.89
80.32
77.26
73.16
71.19
67.50
Tree 3
High-Performance
42
80.05
76.93
80.47
77.59
74.63
72.09
69.07
TABLE VII : Representative ”anchor” solution trees selected from the 200 non-dominated individuals in the 100th generation (CB6133 dataset): (a) Tree 1 (Low-Complexity), (b) Tree 2 (Balanced), and (c) Tree 3 (High-Performance). (Accuracy in Percentage)
Fig. 7 : Visualization of feature representations across seven datasets. Rows (top to bottom): CASP10, CASP11, CASP12, CASP13, and CASP14. Columns: (a) Single-feature baseline, (b) Standard Multi-View Multi-Level Fusion (MMF), and (c) The proposed MOGP-MMF framework.
Intrinsically disordered regions of proteins play a crucial role in cell signaling and drug discovery. However, their high structural flexibility makes accurate residue-level prediction challenging. Existing methods often rely on single-view representations or rigid manual fusion strategies, which fail to effectively balance the complex interplay between local amino acid preferences and long-range sequence patterns. To address these limitations, we propose D2MOE, a Dual-View Multiscale Features and Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm, which consists of two stages. First, a dual-view multiscale feature extraction method is introduced. This method integrates evolutionary views with deep semantic views and employs multiscale extractors to capture structural information across diverse receptive fields. Second, a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm is designed to adaptively discover optimal fusion architectures. By co-evolving discrete feature selection and continuous fusion weights, the algorithm adaptively explores optimal cross-feature architectures to enhance predictive accuracy while maintaining model compactness. Experimental results across three benchmark datasets demonstrate that D2MOE consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods. D2MOE combines the feature extraction capabilities of deep learning with the global search advantages of evolutionary algorithms, enabling efficient feature integration without manual design, and providing a robust computational tool for protein disorder prediction.
Shaokuan Wang, Pengshan Cui, Yining Qian +2
College of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China · School of Computer Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China · Key Laboratory of Data Analytics and Optimization for Smart Industry, Ministry of Education, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China
Accurate protein structure prediction is fundamental to structural biology because protein structure underlies molecular function and provides a basis for mechanistic interpretation. Recent advances in deep learning have transformed the field from multiple sequence alignment (MSA)-driven monomer folding into broader frameworks capable of modeling protein complexes and increasingly heterogeneous molecular systems. Existing reviews have summarized this progress from the perspectives of representative models, application domains, and protein design. Building on these efforts, this review focuses on the methodological evolution of the field itself. It examines recent developments through three closely related dimensions: representations and data, architectures and learning strategies, and confidence and evaluation. Within this perspective, the field is organized into four methodological phases and three cross-cutting transitions: from explicit evolutionary coupling features and early contact prediction to learned sequence representations in AlphaFold2, RoseTTAFold, and ESMFold; from protein-only monomer folding to increasingly integrated modeling of heterogeneous molecular systems in AlphaFold-Multimer, RoseTTAFoldNA, and AlphaFold3; and, more recently, from prediction-oriented structure inference to design-oriented generative modeling in RFdiffusion and related frameworks. This framework provides a clearer understanding of how methodological shifts have shaped the capabilities, limitations, and practical roles of recent models.
Wengan He, Yongsheng Luo, Lihong Jiang +2
Zhuhai College of Science and Technology, Zhuhai, China · Zhuhai UNO Technology Co., Ltd., Zhuhai, China
Protein optimization remains a longstanding goal in life sciences. Existing machine learning-assisted directed evolution (MLDE) methods primarily rely on sequence-only features, overlooking the critical spatial constraints and co-evolutionary interactions encoded in protein structures. However, directly integrating structural information remains challenging due to the scarcity of reliable mutant structures. To address these issues, we propose StructEvo, a novel structure-aware reinforcement learning framework for protein directed evolution. StructEvo employs a delta-structure fusion encoder to approximate mutant structure features via feature differences, enabling dynamic incorporation of spatial knowledge. The vast mutation space is then decomposed into manageable subspaces through a structure-aligned hierarchical action network, while a geometric constraint further stabilizes delta feature learning. Our approach outperforms prior state-of-the-art methods by 9.2% and 16.3% on two challenging optimization benchmarks, and further identifies an experimentally validated epistasis pattern in GFP, highlighting the importance of structural guidance for effective protein directed evolution.
Zikun Nie, Suyuan Zhao, Yizhen Luo +2
Institute of AI Industry Research (AIR), Tsinghua University · Department of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua University · Pharmolix Inc.