Configuration: GCN with ComplEx protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.792 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ComplEx on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ComplEx' Configuration: GCN with ComplEx protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.606 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ComplEx on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ComplEx' Configuration: GCN with majority vote across the representations (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.671 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Author-reported evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / Ensemble on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'Ensemble' Configuration: GCN with majority vote across the representations (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.529 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Author-reported evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / Ensemble on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'Ensemble' Configuration: GCN with ESM-2 protein embeddings (sequence) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.702 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ESM-2 on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ESM-2' Configuration: GCN with ESM-2 protein embeddings (sequence) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.444 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ESM-2 on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ESM-2' Configuration: GCN with ESM-IF1 protein embeddings (structure) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.76 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ESM-IF1 on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ESM-IF1' Configuration: GCN with ESM-IF1 protein embeddings (structure) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.497 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ESM-IF1 on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ESM-IF1' Configuration: GCN with PiFold protein embeddings (structure) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.704 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / PiFold on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'PiFold' Configuration: GCN with PiFold protein embeddings (structure) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.457 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / PiFold on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'PiFold' Configuration: GCN with ProGen2 protein embeddings (sequence) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.715 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ProGen2 on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ProGen2' Configuration: GCN with ProGen2 protein embeddings (sequence) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.454 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ProGen2 on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ProGen2' Configuration: GCN with ProstT5 protein embeddings (structure) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.65 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ProstT5 on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ProstT5' Configuration: GCN with ProstT5 protein embeddings (structure) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.447 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ProstT5 on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ProstT5' Configuration: GCN with ProtTrans protein embeddings (sequence) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.675 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ProtTrans on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ProtTrans' Configuration: GCN with ProtTrans protein embeddings (sequence) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.45 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / ProtTrans on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'ProtTrans' Configuration: GCN with randomly initialised node features (baseline) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.7 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / Random on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'Random' Configuration: GCN with randomly initialised node features (baseline) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.435 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / Random on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'Random' Configuration: GCN with RDF2Vec protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.799 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / RDF2Vec on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'RDF2Vec' Configuration: GCN with RDF2Vec protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.651 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / RDF2Vec on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'RDF2Vec' Configuration: GCN with TransE protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.515 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / TransE on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'TransE' Configuration: GCN with TransE protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.432 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GCN / TransE on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GCN', column 'TransE' Configuration: GraphSAGE with ComplEx protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.772 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GraphSAGE / ComplEx on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GS', column 'ComplEx' Configuration: GraphSAGE with ComplEx protein embeddings (function (knowledge-graph embedding)) (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Hits@100 (Table 5) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.562 Hits at 100 (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GraphSAGE / ComplEx on HuRI (Hits@100)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-hits-100
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 5, block 'HuRI', row 'GS', column 'ComplEx' Configuration: GraphSAGE with majority vote across the representations (PPI embeddings study) Protocol: HuRI PPI link prediction, Accuracy (Table 6) Dataset: HuRI PPI graph (embedding study) 0.622 Accuracy (HuRI PPI link prediction)fraction · higher
Uncertainty: Not reported by the source: Only a table-wide maximum SD is printed (Table 5/6 footnote)
Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible
Author-reported evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons The text's summary does not match the tables: it lists ProtT5 among structure embeddings while the tables print ProstT5; it reports a GraphSAGE with DistMult result (+38% Hits@100 on HuRI) although DistMult is not a column; and the stated gains (for example ESM-2 with GraphSAGE +6% Hits@100 on OGBl-ppa) cannot be reproduced from the printed table values (GS random 0.0104, ESM-2 0.2421). Values are kept as printed; comparisons should rely on the tables only after a reviewer has judged this. Random-feature baselines on OGBl-ppa (GCN 0.0588, GS 0.0104 Hits@100) look far below the public OGB leaderboard values the authors say they reproduced (Supplementary Table S2, not retrieved; reviewer did not verify the leaderboard values).The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Results and discussion, first paragraph; Tables 5 and 6
Methods, coverage and source GraphSAGE / Ensemble on HuRI (Accuracy)
lit-interactions-20261011-ppiemb-protocol-huri-accuracy
Aggregation: Not reported
The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks · Table 6, block 'HuRI', row 'GS', column 'Ensemble'