Comparison of Optimised Geometric Deep Learning Architectures, over Varying Toxicological Assay Data Environments

Fuente: arXiv
Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs principaux: Kalian, Alexander D., Otte, Lennart, Lee, Jaewook, Benfenati, Emilio, Dorne, Jean-Lou C. M., Potter, Claire, Osborne, Olivia J., Guo, Miao, Hogstrand, Christer
Format: Preprint
Publié: 2025
Sujets:
Accès en ligne:
Tags: Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
_version_ 1866911073876049920
author Kalian, Alexander D.
Otte, Lennart
Lee, Jaewook
Benfenati, Emilio
Dorne, Jean-Lou C. M.
Potter, Claire
Osborne, Olivia J.
Guo, Miao
Hogstrand, Christer
author_facet Kalian, Alexander D.
Otte, Lennart
Lee, Jaewook
Benfenati, Emilio
Dorne, Jean-Lou C. M.
Potter, Claire
Osborne, Olivia J.
Guo, Miao
Hogstrand, Christer
contents Geometric deep learning is an emerging technique in Artificial Intelligence (AI) driven cheminformatics, however the unique implications of different Graph Neural Network (GNN) architectures are poorly explored, for this space. This study compared performances of Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs), Graph Attention Networks (GATs) and Graph Isomorphism Networks (GINs), applied to 7 different toxicological assay datasets of varying data abundance and endpoint, to perform binary classification of assay activation. Following pre-processing of molecular graphs, enforcement of class-balance and stratification of all datasets across 5 folds, Bayesian optimisations were carried out, for each GNN applied to each assay dataset (resulting in 21 unique Bayesian optimisations). Optimised GNNs performed at Area Under the Curve (AUC) scores ranging from 0.728-0.849 (averaged across all folds), naturally varying between specific assays and GNNs. GINs were found to consistently outperform GCNs and GATs, for the top 5 of 7 most data-abundant toxicological assays. GATs however significantly outperformed over the remaining 2 most data-scarce assays. This indicates that GINs are a more optimal architecture for data-abundant environments, whereas GATs are a more optimal architecture for data-scarce environments. Subsequent analysis of the explored higher-dimensional hyperparameter spaces, as well as optimised hyperparameter states, found that GCNs and GATs reached measurably closer optimised states with each other, compared to GINs, further indicating the unique nature of GINs as a GNN algorithm.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2507_17775
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Comparison of Optimised Geometric Deep Learning Architectures, over Varying Toxicological Assay Data Environments
Kalian, Alexander D.
Otte, Lennart
Lee, Jaewook
Benfenati, Emilio
Dorne, Jean-Lou C. M.
Potter, Claire
Osborne, Olivia J.
Guo, Miao
Hogstrand, Christer
Quantitative Methods
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
Geometric deep learning is an emerging technique in Artificial Intelligence (AI) driven cheminformatics, however the unique implications of different Graph Neural Network (GNN) architectures are poorly explored, for this space. This study compared performances of Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs), Graph Attention Networks (GATs) and Graph Isomorphism Networks (GINs), applied to 7 different toxicological assay datasets of varying data abundance and endpoint, to perform binary classification of assay activation. Following pre-processing of molecular graphs, enforcement of class-balance and stratification of all datasets across 5 folds, Bayesian optimisations were carried out, for each GNN applied to each assay dataset (resulting in 21 unique Bayesian optimisations). Optimised GNNs performed at Area Under the Curve (AUC) scores ranging from 0.728-0.849 (averaged across all folds), naturally varying between specific assays and GNNs. GINs were found to consistently outperform GCNs and GATs, for the top 5 of 7 most data-abundant toxicological assays. GATs however significantly outperformed over the remaining 2 most data-scarce assays. This indicates that GINs are a more optimal architecture for data-abundant environments, whereas GATs are a more optimal architecture for data-scarce environments. Subsequent analysis of the explored higher-dimensional hyperparameter spaces, as well as optimised hyperparameter states, found that GCNs and GATs reached measurably closer optimised states with each other, compared to GINs, further indicating the unique nature of GINs as a GNN algorithm.
title Comparison of Optimised Geometric Deep Learning Architectures, over Varying Toxicological Assay Data Environments
topic Quantitative Methods
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.17775