A database of calculated solution parameters for the AlphaFold predicted protein structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent spectacular advances by AI programs in 3D structure predictions from protein sequences have revolutionized the field in terms of accuracy and speed. The resulting "folding frenzy" has already produced predicted protein structure databases for the entire human and other organisms' proteomes. However, rapidly ascertaining a predicted structure's reliability based on measured properties in solution should be considered. Shape-sensitive hydrodynamic parameters such as the diffusion and sedimentation coefficients ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]) and the intrinsic viscosity ([η]) can provide a rapid assessment of the overall structure likeliness, and SAXS would yield the structure-related pair-wise distance distribution function p(r) vs. r. Using the extensively validated UltraScan SOlution MOdeler (US-SOMO) suite, a database was implemented calculating from AlphaFold structures the corresponding [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [η], p(r) vs. r, and other parameters. Circular dichroism spectra were computed using the SESCA program. Some of AlphaFold's drawbacks were mitigated, such as generating whenever possible a protein's mature form. Others, like the AlphaFold direct applicability to single-chain structures only, the absence of prosthetic groups, or flexibility issues, are discussed. Overall, this implementation of the US-SOMO-AF database should already aid in rapidly evaluating the consistency in solution of a relevant portion of AlphaFold predicted protein structures.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.021 |
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".