Papers › Improving Antibody Humanness Prediction using Patent Data

Improving Antibody Humanness Prediction using Patent Data

25 Jan 2024arXiv:2401.14442archive 2025-07-28

Talip Ucar, Aubin Ramon, Dino Oglic, Rebecca Croasdale-Wood, Tom Diethe, Pietro Sormanni

We investigate the potential of patent data for improving the antibody humanness prediction using a multi-stage, multi-loss training process. Humanness serves as a proxy for the immunogenic response to antibody therapeutics, one of the major causes of attrition in drug discovery and a challenging obstacle for their use in clinical settings. We pose the initial learning stage as a weakly-supervised contrastive-learning problem, where each antibody sequence is associated with possibly multiple identifiers of function and the objective is to learn an encoder that groups them according to their patented properties. We then freeze a part of the contrastive encoder and continue training it on the patent data using the cross-entropy loss to predict the humanness score of a given antibody sequence. We illustrate the utility of the patent data and our approach by performing inference on three different immunogenicity datasets, unseen during training. Our empirical results demonstrate that the learned model consistently outperforms the alternative baselines and establishes new state-of-the-art on five out of six inference tasks, irrespective of the used metric.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

5 samples harvested; 4 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 5 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from AstraZeneca/SelfPAD. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections