A comparative framework leveraging Bland–Altman agreement analysis is introduced, to evaluate per-residue Cα-confidence differences and Per-Residue profiles (PRPs), complemented by Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP).
Abstract
Abstract Predicting accurate protein structures is essential for understanding molecular mechanisms, interpreting the impact of sequence variation, and supporting translational applications ranging from drug discovery to clinical genomics. Recent advances in deep-learning–based predictors such as AlphaFold2, OpenFold, and AlphaFold3 have transformed structural biology, enabling routine in silico modeling even for challenging or previously uncharacterized proteins. However, systematic benchmarking of these tools—especially for novel targets and single amino acid variants—remains limited. Conventional global metrics often fail to capture biologically meaningful discrepancies. By evaluating multiple implementations of AlphaFold2 and OpenFold, together with ColabFold and the AlphaFold3 server, across 10 different proteins and 222 single amino acid protein variants encompassing a wide range of sizes, structures, and functions, we show that although widely used global indicators—like mean pLDDT, pTM-score, and RMSD—frequently suggest comparable performance, substantial local-level differences remain elusive. To address this gap, we introduce a comparative framework leveraging Bland–Altman agreement analysis, to evaluate per-residue Cα-confidence differences and Per-Residue profiles (PRPs), complemented by Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP). This approach reveals marked localized divergences, particularly within flexible or intrinsically disordered regions, where both predictor choice and single-residue substitutions trigger the largest conformational shifts. We further demonstrate that using reduced homology databases has minimal impact on predicted structural quality, offering computationally efficient alternatives. Collectively, our findings underscore the importance of integrating global and residue-specific evaluations to more accurately assess robustness, agreement, and practical usability across contemporary protein structure prediction methods.
Built with VRH, VenusREM2 is the first to rank highest in all function, taxon, MSA-depth, and mutation-depth categories, with a ProteinGym Average Spearman of 0.556, 0.038 above the prior best.
Yang Tan, Qi-Jia Tian, Gang-Yu Sun et al.· 0 citations
It is demonstrated that modern EC predictors largely fail to distinguish catalytically incompetent variants from functional enzymes, and it is proposed that integrating structure-aware negative examples into both training and benchmarking is critical for developing functionally robust models in computational enzymology...
João Sartori, Ana Carolina Ramos Guimarães, Lucas de Almeida Machado· bioRxiv· 0 citations
This study proposes DeepPEP, a large language model-based framework designed to reliably transfer essential protein annotations between distantly related organisms and suggests that DeepPEP is a powerful strategy for prokaryotic essential protein prediction.
Ying Du, Zhikang Liu, Jing Wan· Journal of Microbiological M...· 0 citations
Deep learning-based protein structure prediction methods that leverage evolutionary information from multiple sequence alignments (MSAs), exemplified by AlphaFold2, have achieved remarkable accuracy. However, existing methods still struggle to predict challenging proteins, particularly those with novel folds or limited...
This framework provides a clearer understanding of how methodological shifts have shaped the capabilities, limitations, and practical roles of recent models.
Wen-Gan He, Yong-Sheng Luo, Lihong Jiang et al.· 0 citations
UniStab is introduced, an end-to-end framework for predicting stability changes across all mutation types by leveraging the implicit geometric reasoning of a pre-trained folding model and demonstrates state-of-the-art performance, particularly in the challenging scenarios of multi-point mutations and indels.
Hong Tan, Sheng-Geng Lin, Yi Xiong· Chemical Science· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.