Inverse folding of protein complexes with a structure-informed language model enables unsupervised antibody evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models trained on sequence information alone are capable of learning high level principles of protein design. However, beyond sequence, the three-dimensional structures of proteins determine their specific function, activity, and evolvability. Here we show that a general protein language model augmented with protein structure backbone coordinates and trained on the inverse folding problem can guide evolution for diverse proteins without needing to explicitly model individual functional tasks. We demonstrate inverse folding to be an effective unsupervised, structure-based sequence optimization strategy that also generalizes to multimeric complexes by implicitly learning features of binding and amino acid epistasis. Using this approach, we screened ~30 variants of two therapeutic clinical antibodies used to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection and achieved up to 26-fold improvement in neutralization and 37-fold improvement in affinity against antibody-escaped viral variants-of-concern BQ.1.1 and XBB.1.5, respectively. In addition to substantial overall improvements in protein function, we find inverse folding performs with leading experimental success rates among other reported machine learning-guided directed evolution methods, without requiring any task-specific training data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".