Papers › ProLLM: Protein Chain-of-Thoughts Enhanced LLM for Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction
ProLLM: Protein Chain-of-Thoughts Enhanced LLM for Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction
Mingyu Jin, Haochen Xue, Zhenting Wang, Boming Kang, Ruosong Ye, Kaixiong Zhou, Mengnan Du, Yongfeng Zhang
The prediction of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) is crucial for understanding biological functions and diseases. Previous machine learning approaches to PPI prediction mainly focus on direct physical interactions, ignoring the broader context of nonphysical connections through intermediate proteins, thus limiting their effectiveness. The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) provides a new opportunity for addressing this complex biological challenge. By transforming structured data into natural language prompts, we can map the relationships between proteins into texts. This approach allows LLMs to identify indirect connections between proteins, tracing the path from upstream to downstream. Therefore, we propose a novel framework ProLLM that employs an LLM tailored for PPI for the first time. Specifically, we propose Protein Chain of Thought (ProCoT), which replicates the biological mechanism of signaling pathways as natural language prompts. ProCoT considers a signaling pathway as a protein reasoning process, which starts from upstream proteins and passes through several intermediate proteins to transmit biological signals to downstream proteins. Thus, we can use ProCoT to predict the interaction between upstream proteins and downstream proteins. The training of ProLLM employs the ProCoT format, which enhances the model's understanding of complex biological problems. In addition to ProCoT, this paper also contributes to the exploration of embedding replacement of protein sites in natural language prompts, and instruction fine-tuning in protein knowledge datasets. We demonstrate the efficacy of ProLLM through rigorous validation against benchmark datasets, showing significant improvement over existing methods in terms of prediction accuracy and generalizability. The code is available at: https://github.com/MingyuJ666/ProLLM.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2405.06649")
Code
Syntology Ran 2 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
2 samples harvested; 2 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 2 of the 2 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 mingyuj666/prollm. “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.
6ce16a86620e8996 · report
eb82cc2271b8c4fc · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
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