Accurate prediction of protein folding rates from sequence and sequence-derived residue flexibility and solvent accessibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protein folding rates vary by several orders of magnitude and they depend on the topology of the fold and the size and composition of the sequence. Although recent works show that the rates can be predicted from the sequence, allowing for high-throughput annotations, they consider only the sequence and its predicted secondary structure. We propose a novel sequence-based predictor, PFR-AF, which utilizes solvent accessibility and residue flexibility predicted from the sequence, to improve predictions and provide insights into the folding process. The predictor includes three linear regressions for proteins with two-state, multistate, and unknown (mixed-state) folding kinetics. PFR-AF on average outperforms current methods when tested on three datasets. The proposed approach provides high-quality predictions in the absence of similarity between the predicted and the training sequences. The PFR-AF's predictions are characterized by high (between 0.71 and 0.95, depending on the dataset) correlation and the lowest (between 0.75 and 0.9) mean absolute errors with respect to the experimental rates, as measured using out-of-sample tests. Our models reveal that for the two-state chains inclusion of solvent-exposed Ala may accelerate the folding, while increased content of Ile may reduce the folding speed. We also demonstrate that increased flexibility of coils facilitates faster folding and that proteins with larger content of solvent-exposed strands may fold at a slower pace. The increased flexibility of the solvent-exposed residues is shown to elongate folding, which also holds, with a lower correlation, for buried residues. Two case studies are included to support our findings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".