On Recovering Higher-order Interactions from Protein Language Models

Published: 04 Mar 2024, Last Modified: 29 Apr 2024GEM PosterEveryoneRevisionsBibTeXCC BY 4.0
Track: Machine learning: computational method and/or computational results
Keywords: Protein language model, Fourier transform, Sparsity, Ruggedness, Higher-order interactions
TL;DR: We conduct a sparse Fourier transform on protein regions to extract interactions from protein language models.
Abstract: Protein language models leverage evolutionary information to perform state-of-the-art 3D structure and zero-shot variant prediction. Yet, extracting and explaining all the mutational interactions that govern model predictions remains difficult as it requires querying the entire amino acid space for $n$ sites using $20^n$ sequences, which is computationally expensive even for moderate values of $n$ (e.g., $n\sim10$). Although approaches to lower the sample complexity exist, they often limit the interpretability of the model to just single and pairwise interactions. Recently, computationally scalable algorithms relying on the assumption of sparsity in the Fourier domain have emerged to learn interactions from experimental data. However, extracting interactions from language models poses unique challenges: it's unclear if sparsity is always present or if it is the only metric needed to assess the utility of Fourier algorithms. Herein, we develop a framework to do a systematic Fourier analysis of the protein language model ESM2 applied on three proteins—green fluorescent protein (GFP), tumor protein P53 (TP53), and G domain B1 (GB1)—across various sites for 228 experiments. We demonstrate that ESM2 is dominated by three regions in the sparsity-ruggedness plane, two of which are better suited for sparse Fourier transforms. Validations on two sample proteins demonstrate recovery of all interactions with $R^2=0.72$ in the more sparse region and $R^2=0.66$ in the more dense region, using only 7 million out of $20^{10}\sim10^{13}$ ESM2 samples, reducing the computational time by a staggering factor of 15,000.
Submission Number: 99
Loading