Improving the accuracy of protein stability predictions with multistate design using a variety of backbone ensembles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multistate computational protein design (MSD) with backbone ensembles approximating conformational flexibility can predict higher quality sequences than single-state design with a single fixed backbone. However, it is currently unclear what characteristics of backbone ensembles are required for the accurate prediction of protein sequence stability. In this study, we aimed to improve the accuracy of protein stability predictions made with MSD by using a variety of backbone ensembles to recapitulate the experimentally measured stability of 85 Streptococcal protein G domain β1 sequences. Ensembles tested here include an NMR ensemble as well as those generated by molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, by Backrub motions, and by PertMin, a new method that we developed involving the perturbation of atomic coordinates followed by energy minimization. MSD with the PertMin ensembles resulted in the most accurate predictions by providing the highest number of stable sequences in the top 25, and by correctly binning sequences as stable or unstable with the highest success rate (≈90%) and the lowest number of false positives. The performance of PertMin ensembles is due to the fact that their members closely resemble the input crystal structure and have low potential energy. Conversely, the NMR ensemble as well as those generated by MD simulations at 500 or 1000 K reduced prediction accuracy due to their low structural similarity to the crystal structure. The ensembles tested herein thus represent on- or off-target models of the native protein fold and could be used in future studies to design for desired properties other than stability.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".