SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sakarya University Journal of Computer and Information Sciences / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 3

Signal Processing and Dimensionality Reduction Algorithms for High-Dimensional Time-Series Data Applied to Biomolecular Simulations

Kevser Kübra Kırboğa(Bilecik Şeyh Edebali University)0000-0002-2917-8860
Ecir Uğur Küçüksille(SULEYMAN DEMIREL UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-3293-9878
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

All analysis pipelines are implemented in Python 3.13 with open-source libraries (NumPy, SciPy, Matplotlib) to ensure reproducibility and extensibility.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:High-dimensional time-series datasets with stochastic noise present fundamental challenges in signal processing and data analytics across diverse computational domains.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study develops and validates a systematic framework that integrates digital signal processing techniques with dimensionality reduction algorithms to extract meaningful trends from noisy, high-dimensional temporal data.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:All analysis pipelines are implemented in Python 3.13 with open-source libraries (NumPy, SciPy, Matplotlib) to ensure reproducibility and extensibility.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dimensionality reduction · Digital signal processing · Molecular dynamics simulation

Abstract

High-dimensional time-series datasets with stochastic noise present fundamental challenges in signal processing and data analytics across diverse computational domains. This study develops and validates a systematic framework that integrates digital signal processing techniques with dimensionality reduction algorithms to extract meaningful trends from noisy, high-dimensional temporal data. We implement and compare five filtering approaches—Savitzky-Golay polynomial regression, Moving Average, Gaussian, Butterworth, and Wavelet denoising—combined with Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on GPU-accelerated MD simulation infrastructure (NVIDIA GPU based on the Blackwell architecture, CUDA 12.9), benchmarking performance on two contrasting biomolecular systems: Frataxin (119 residues, rigid) and Carbonic Anhydrase IX (CAIX) (257 residues, dynamic). A comprehensive five-filter comparison across both systems reveals consistent performance rankings: Wavelet achieves the highest signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for both Frataxin (23.47 dB) and CAIX (13.80 dB), while Savitzky-Golay provides the optimal balance between noise reduction and low-frequency preservation (>99%). Critically, Savitzky-Golay’s improvement over the Moving Average is substantially greater for dynamic CAIX (16.3%) than for rigid Frataxin (3.1%), demonstrating enhanced performance precisely where distinguishing conformational transitions from thermal noise is most challenging. All filters preserve low-frequency conformational dynamics while reducing high-frequency noise, with the extracted noise components validated by Gaussian distribution analysis (σ ≈ 0.008 nm) across both systems and all filtering methods. PCA-based dimensionality reduction achieves 11.9:1 compression (357 dimensions → 30 principal components) for Frataxin while retaining 80% of conformational variance, with CAIX requiring only 11 components for equivalent variance capture due to dominant collective motions. The complete analysis pipeline processes 50,001 frames in less than 0.2 seconds, representing negligible overhead (<0.001%) relative to simulation time. Cross-system validation with consistent filter rankings confirms methodology generalizability across proteins spanning diverse dynamical regimes. All analysis pipelines are implemented in Python 3.13 with open-source libraries (NumPy, SciPy, Matplotlib) to ensure reproducibility and extensibility.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kırboğa, K. K., Küçüksille, E. U. (2026). Signal Processing and Dimensionality Reduction Algorithms for High-Dimensional Time-Series Data Applied to Biomolecular Simulations. Sakarya University Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, Volume: 9 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.35377/saucis...1832143

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. G. I. Kim and K. Chung, “Extraction of Features for Time Series Classification Using Noise Injection,” Sensors, vol. 24, no. 19, p. 6402, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/24/19/6402.
  2. H.-T. Wu, “Current state of nonlinear-type time–frequency analysis and applications to high-frequency biomedical signals,” Current Opinion in Systems Biology, vol. 23, pp. 8–21, 2020.
  3. J. E. Stone, J. C. Phillips, L. Freddolino, D. J. Hardy, L. G. Trabuco, and K. Schulten, “Accelerating molecular modeling applications with graphics processors,” J Comput Chem, vol. 28, no. 16, pp. 2618–2640, Dec. 2007.
  4. K. Lindorff-Larsen, P. Maragakis, S. Piana, M. P. Eastwood, R. O. Dror, and D. E. Shaw, “Systematic Validation of Protein Force Fields against Experimental Data,” PLOS ONE, vol. 7, no. 2, p. e32131, 2012.
  5. S. Hayward, “A Retrospective on the Development of Methods for the Analysis of Protein Conformational Ensembles,” Protein J, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 181–191, Jun. 2023.
  6. M. Schmid, D. Rath, and U. Diebold, “Why and How Savitzky-Golay Filters Should Be Replaced,” ACS Meas Sci Au, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 185–196, Apr. 2022.
  7. H. Yao, F. Da Costa Santana, and Y. Wang, “Properties of ethanol-based foamed asphalt binders using the molecular dynamics (MD) method,” Materials Research Express, vol. 11, no. 6, p. 061501, 2024.
  8. G. A. Alou Angulo, A. Rivero Santamaría, C. Toubin, and M. Monnerville, “Ab Initio Molecular Dynamics Calculations on NO Oxidation over Oxygen-Functionalized Highly Oriented Pyrolytic Graphite,” Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2024.
  9. M. Li, D. Yang, Q. Li, Y. Liang, C. Chen, and L. He, “Optimizing and Regulating Electric-Induced Breakup of Salt-Containing Droplets through Magnetic Field Coupling: Insights from Molecular Dynamics Simulations,” Langmuir, 2025.
  10. Z. Yakang, M. Tajadod, L. Jinghan, and P. Douxing, “Molecular dynamics modeling for nanoindentation effects of puckered arsenene,” Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, vol. 35, no. 10, p. 105001, 2025.
  11. K. Wilke, S. Tao, S. Calero, A. Lervik, and T. S. van Erp, “NaCl Dissociation Explored Through Predictive Power Path Sampling Analysis,” Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 2025.
  12. V. Neuman, P. Wesołowski, K. Bojarski, D. Dewan, M. Schäffler, P. Smardz, and D. Wales, “Visualising the Energy Landscape for a Molecular Dynamics Trajectory,” ChemRxiv, 2025.
  13. S. Moradi, A. Nowroozi, M. Aryaei Nezhad, P. Jalali, R. Khosravi, and M. Shahlaei, “A review on description dynamics and conformational changes of proteins using a combination of principal component analysis and molecular dynamics simulation,” Computers in Biology and Medicine, vol. 183, p. 109245, 2024.
  14. A. Amadei, A. B. Linssen, and H. J. Berendsen, “Essential dynamics of proteins,” Proteins, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 412–425, Dec. 1993.
  15. D. Roccatano, “Principal component analysis of molecular dynamics trajectories,” WIREs Computational Molecular Science, vol. 15, no. 1, p. e70004, 2025.
  16. F. Mazza, L. Nardo, A. Bhattacharya, and A. Bhattacharya, “Investigating Structural and Dynamic Effects of EXO5 Missense Variants Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations,” Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 2025.
  17. A. Khan, S. Ahmad, S. S. Azam, and D.-Q. Wei, “Essential dynamics and free energy landscape analysis of RAF1-RAP1A complex with wild-type and mutant forms associated with cancer,” Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 2024.
  18. X. Song et al., “Accurate Prediction of Protein Structural Flexibility by Deep Learning Integrating Intricate Atomic Structures and Cryo-EM Density Information,” Nature Communications, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 5538, 2024.
  19. Y. Vander Meersche, G. Cretin, A. Gheeraert, J.-C. Gelly, and T. Galochkina, “ATLAS: protein flexibility description from atomistic molecular dynamics simulations,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 52, no. D1, pp. D384–D392, 2024.
  20. R. Schmirler, M. Heinzinger, and B. Rost, “Fine-tuning protein language models boosts predictions across diverse tasks,” Nature Communications, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 7407, 2024.
  21. M. Y. Lobanov, N. S. Bogatyreva, and O. V. Galzitskaya, “Radius of gyration as an indicator of protein structure compactness,” Molecular Biology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 623–628, 2008.
  22. W. Han, Z. Chen, M.-W. Wang, and Q. Zhou, “gmx RRCS: A Precision Tool for Detecting Subtle Conformational Dynamics in Molecular Simulations,” Journal of Molecular Biology, vol. 437, p. 169129, 2025.
  23. E. Prašnikar, M. Ljubič, A. Perdih, and J. Borišek, “Machine learning heralding a new development phase in molecular dynamics simulations,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 57, no. 4, p. 102, 2024.
  24. N. Oues, “Development of automated computational methods for the redesign of protein dynamics using biomolecular simulations and machine learning,” PhD Thesis, Brunel University London, 2025.
  25. J. Kemppainen, G. Odegard, T. Muzzy, and T. Wavrunek, “Understanding and Interpreting Stress-Strain Curves from Molecular Dynamics Simulation of Amorphous Polymers,” ChemRxiv, 2025.
  26. T. Yoshidome, “Four-dimensional imaging for cryo-electron microscopy experiments using molecular simulations and manifold learning,” Journal of Computational Chemistry, vol. 45, no. 11, pp. 738–751, 2024.
  27. A. Son et al., “Utilizing Molecular Dynamics Simulations, Machine Learning, Cryo-EM, and NMR Spectroscopy to Predict and Validate Protein Dynamics,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 25, no. 17, p. 9725, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/25/17/9725.
  28. S. K. Burley et al., “Updated resources for exploring experimentally-determined PDB structures and Computed Structure Models at the RCSB Protein Data Bank,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 53, no. D1, pp. D564–D574, 2025.
  29. V. Alterio, M. Hilvo, A. Di Fiore, C. T. Supuran, P. Pan, S. Parkkila, A. Scaloni, J. Pastorek, S. Pastorekova, C. Pedone, A. Scozzafava, S. M. Monti, and G. De Simone, “Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of the tumor-associated human carbonic anhydrase IX,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 106, no. 38, pp. 16233–16238, 2009.
  30. C. T. Supuran, “Carbonic anhydrases: novel therapeutic applications for inhibitors and activators,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 168–181, 2008.
  31. Y. Chen and J. Yang, “Acceleration of the GROMACS Free-Energy Perturbation Calculations on GPUs,” ACS Omega, vol. 10, no. 22, pp. 22858–22873, Jun. 2025.
  32. H. Yu, H. Ma, and Y. Xie, “Pedagogical applications of all-atom molecular dynamics simulation in coal seam seepage mechanics,” Sci Rep, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 29698, Aug. 13, 2025.
  33. B. Hess, “P-LINCS: A Parallel Linear Constraint Solver for Molecular Simulation,” J Chem Theory Comput, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 116–122, Jan. 2008.
  34. J. A. Harris, R. Liu, V. Martins de Oliveira, E. A. Vázquez-Montelongo, J. A. Henderson, and J. Shen, “GPU-Accelerated All-Atom Particle-Mesh Ewald Continuous Constant pH Molecular Dynamics in Amber,” J Chem Theory Comput, vol. 18, no. 12, pp. 7510–7527, Dec. 13, 2022.
  35. M. Schmid, D. Rath, and U. Diebold, “Correction to ‘Why and How Savitzky–Golay Filters Should Be Replaced’,” ACS Measurement Science Au, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 236–236, 2023.
  36. S. Sadeghi and P. Cpi, “A Comprehensive Review of Digital Signal Processing (DSP) Algorithms and Their Applications in Telecommunication and Wireless Communication Systems,” International Journal of Engineering & Technology Sciences, vol. 2025, p. 60, 2025.
  37. R. Núñez-Franco et al., “Thermodynamic Stabilization of Human Frataxin,” bioRxiv, p. 2023.09.08.556816, 2023.
  38. S. Matsumoto, S. Ishida, K. Terayama, and Y. Okuno, “Quantitative analysis of protein dynamics using a deep learning technique combined with experimental cryo-EM density data and MD simulations,” Biophys Physicobiol, vol. 20, no. 2, p. e200022, 2023.
  39. E. A. Roman, S. E. Faraj, M. Gallo, A. G. Salvay, D. U. Ferreiro, and J. Santos, “Protein Stability and Dynamics Modulation: The Case of Human Frataxin,” PLOS ONE, vol. 7, no. 9, p. e45743, 2012.
  40. P. Kouba, J. Planas-Iglesias, J. Damborský, J. Sedlar, S. Mazurenko, and J. Sivic, “Learning to engineer protein flexibility,” 2024.
  41. M. E. Noguera et al., “Insights on the conformational dynamics of human frataxin through modifications of loop-1,” Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, vol. 636, pp. 123–137, 2017.
  42. P. Saha et al., “Exploring force-driven stochastic folding dynamics in mechano-responsive proteins and implications in phenotypic variation,” Nat Commun, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 1018, Jan. 25, 2025.
  43. C. J. O. Reichhardt, D. McDermott, and C. Reichhardt, “Using principal component analysis to distinguish different dynamic phases in superconducting vortex matter,” Physical Review B, vol. 111, no. 10, p. 104508, 2025.
  44. B. Farhadi, M. Beygisangchin, N. Ghamari, J. Jakmunee, and T. Tang, “Molecular dynamics simulations of proteins: an in-depth review of computational strategies, structural insights, and their role in medicinal chemistry and drug development,” Biol Cybern, vol. 119, no. 4–6, p. 28, Sep. 26, 2025.