bytedance / bytedance/Protenix
performance after fine-tuning
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 2.1k
- Forks
- 312
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Hello,
This model was pre-trained on Protein, DNA, and RNA data collectively. Therefore, I initially expected that fine-tuning with RNA-only data would improve its performance specifically for RNA structure prediction. However, the results did not align with my expectations.
Despite adjusting parameters such as lowering the learning rate and tuning ema_decay, the more I fine-tuned the model, the worse its performance became on the test RNA dataset. In the end, the pretrained model remained the best-performing version.
Do you have any advice on why this might be happening or how I could improve the fine-tuning process?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no files, tests, or entry points. Start by locating the fine-tuning and RNA evaluation workflow, then compare the pretrained and fine-tuned runs, including learning rate and ema_decay settings. Done means identifying why fine-tuning degrades RNA test performance or documenting a validated improvement.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- bioinformatics, machine-learning
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100