dataset_info:
- config_name: all_organism_annotation
features:
- name: entry
dtype: string
- name: target_relation
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 2248542263.378806
num_examples: 1718675
- name: validation
num_bytes: 86197336.33334553
num_examples: 65885
- name: test
num_bytes: 23622662.287848327
num_examples: 18056
download_size: 434648391
dataset_size: 2358362262
- config_name: all_organism_generation
features:
- name: entry
dtype: string
- name: target_relation
dtype: string
- name: target_value
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 6147186072.329801
num_examples: 2941547
- name: validation
num_bytes: 217454147.0669514
num_examples: 104056
- name: test
num_bytes: 62695489.603248335
num_examples: 30001
download_size: 1309929051
dataset_size: 6427335709.000001
- config_name: ppi_annotation
features:
- name: entry_a
dtype: string
- name: entry_b
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
- name: label
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 282097207.1774354
num_examples: 101524
- name: validation
num_bytes: 1856122.043994788
num_examples: 668
- name: test
num_bytes: 6068518.778569786
num_examples: 2184
download_size: 77352111
dataset_size: 290021847.99999994
- config_name: ppi_generation
features:
- name: entry_a
dtype: string
- name: entry_b
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 117502225.60757262
num_examples: 50762
- name: validation
num_bytes: 773132.3303441404
num_examples: 334
- name: test
num_bytes: 2527726.0620832373
num_examples: 1092
download_size: 36837122
dataset_size: 120803084
- config_name: scop_annotation
features:
- name: entry
dtype: string
- name: target_relation
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 35778372.65808565
num_examples: 33024
- name: validation
num_bytes: 3402975.669787035
num_examples: 3141
- name: test
num_bytes: 2483164.672127311
num_examples: 2292
download_size: 8092078
dataset_size: 41664513
- config_name: scop_generation
features:
- name: entry
dtype: string
- name: target_relation
dtype: string
- name: target_value
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 41281902.13993774
num_examples: 32141
- name: validation
num_bytes: 3966227.367167411
num_examples: 3088
- name: test
num_bytes: 2204030.4928948437
num_examples: 1716
download_size: 12338288
dataset_size: 47452160
- config_name: task_a_annotation
features:
- name: entry
dtype: string
- name: target_relation
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 55844564.66212483
num_examples: 35642
- name: validation
num_bytes: 4058061.3454605048
num_examples: 2590
- name: test
num_bytes: 7022482.992414665
num_examples: 4482
download_size: 13900695
dataset_size: 66925109
- config_name: task_a_generation
features:
- name: entry
dtype: string
- name: target_relation
dtype: string
- name: target_value
dtype: string
- name: instruction
dtype: string
- name: reasoning
dtype: string
- name: answer
dtype: string
splits:
- name: train
num_bytes: 256133960.82203332
num_examples: 111732
- name: validation
num_bytes: 19022299.85054624
num_examples: 8298
- name: test
num_bytes: 29312864.327420436
num_examples: 12787
download_size: 62508605
dataset_size: 304469124.99999994
configs:
- config_name: all_organism_annotation
data_files:
- split: train
path: all_organism_annotation/train-*
- split: validation
path: all_organism_annotation/validation-*
- split: test
path: all_organism_annotation/test-*
- config_name: all_organism_generation
data_files:
- split: train
path: all_organism_generation/train-*
- split: validation
path: all_organism_generation/validation-*
- split: test
path: all_organism_generation/test-*
- config_name: ppi_annotation
data_files:
- split: train
path: ppi_annotation/train-*
- split: validation
path: ppi_annotation/validation-*
- split: test
path: ppi_annotation/test-*
- config_name: ppi_generation
data_files:
- split: train
path: ppi_generation/train-*
- split: validation
path: ppi_generation/validation-*
- split: test
path: ppi_generation/test-*
- config_name: scop_annotation
data_files:
- split: train
path: scop_annotation/train-*
- split: validation
path: scop_annotation/validation-*
- split: test
path: scop_annotation/test-*
- config_name: scop_generation
data_files:
- split: train
path: scop_generation/train-*
- split: validation
path: scop_generation/validation-*
- split: test
path: scop_generation/test-*
- config_name: task_a_annotation
data_files:
- split: train
path: task_a_annotation/train-*
- split: validation
path: task_a_annotation/validation-*
- split: test
path: task_a_annotation/test-*
- config_name: task_a_generation
data_files:
- split: train
path: task_a_generation/train-*
- split: validation
path: task_a_generation/validation-*
- split: test
path: task_a_generation/test-*
eshmun-thinking
Thinking-aware instruction-tuning dataset for protein language models: chain-of-thought
<think>...</think> reasoning traces, built programmatically from UniProt/SCOP knowledge
graphs (not distilled from an external LLM or self-sampled), covering protein annotation
(sequence → description) and generation (description → sequence) in both directions.
Hypothesis under test: does inserting an explicit reasoning step grounded in real sequence features (motifs, domains, GO function/process/localization, EC numbers, SCOP fold/superfamily/ family, PPI partners) before the final answer improve instruction-tuned protein models over direct instruction tuning (InstructProtein/ProLLaMA-style)?
Configs
8 configs, each with train/validation/test splits (sequence-identity-based via MMseqs2:
validation <70% identity to train, test <30% identity to train):
| config | task family | direction | examples |
|---|---|---|---|
task_a_annotation |
family/function/process/localization/catalytic activity (human) | sequence → property | 42,714 |
task_a_generation |
same, generation direction | property → sequence | 132,817 |
all_organism_annotation |
same task family, all reviewed SwissProt organisms | sequence → property | 1,802,616 |
all_organism_generation |
same, generation direction | property → sequence | 3,075,604 |
ppi_annotation |
protein-protein interaction (1:3 positive:negative) | pair → yes/no | 104,376 |
ppi_generation |
protein-protein interaction | partner + context → sequence | 52,188 |
scop_annotation |
SCOP fold/superfamily/family | sequence → property | 38,457 |
scop_generation |
SCOP fold/superfamily/family | property → sequence | 36,945 |
Each row has instruction, reasoning (the <think>...</think> block), answer, plus
task-specific identifier columns (entry, entry_a/entry_b, target_relation,
target_value, label).
Protein sequence encoding
Sequences are wrapped as <protein>...</protein> with a Ƥ character joining every residue
("Ƥ".join(sequence)), e.g. <protein>MƤSƤLƤGƤLƤL...</protein>. This matches the tokenization
convention of the InstructProtein-based pilot this dataset currently trains
(khairi/Eshmun-Thinking-Pilot), whose tokenizer has no protein-specific vocabulary and would
otherwise BPE-merge multiple residues into one token, losing residue-level granularity. Strip
Ƥ to recover the raw sequence.
Reasoning trace subjects
Annotation direction: reasoning cites real, known facts about the specific queried protein
(or, for SCOP, the other two structural levels of the same solved entry) — subject is literally
protein (or protein_a/protein_b for PPI, since both are given inputs).
Generation direction: the model is given only one stated property as input (e.g.
member_of = "Cytochrome P450 family"), so reasoning cannot cite other instance-specific facts
about a not-yet-generated sequence without asserting things the model can't know and inverting
the real causal order (sequence determines function, not the reverse). Instead it cites
population-level statistics about the target category, computed from train-split entries
only, and the triple subject reflects that — a short (one/two-word) category label, not
protein:
target_relation |
subject |
|---|---|
catalyzes |
catalytic_activity |
has_function |
molecular_function |
involved_in |
biological_process |
located_in |
cellular_component |
member_of |
family |
scop_fold |
fold |
scop_superfamily |
superfamily |
scop_family |
scop_family |
Example (task_a_generation, target catalyzes = 1.-.-.-):
instruction: I want a protein sequence with the catalytic activity described by EC number 1.-.-.-.
reasoning: <think>
(catalytic_activity, has_length, [>400] amino acids)
(catalytic_activity, involved_in, glycolipid biosynthetic process)
(catalytic_activity, located_in, mitochondrion)
...
</think>
answer: <protein>MƤLƤPƤNƤTƤGƤRƤL...</protein>