Manifold-constrained nucleus-level denoising diffusion model for structure-based drug design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AI models have shown great potential in structure-based drug design, generating ligands with high binding affinities. However, existing models have often overlooked a crucial physical prior: Atoms must maintain a minimum pairwise distance to avoid atomic collision, a phenomenon governed by the balance of attractive and repulsive forces. To mitigate such atomic collisions, we propose NucleusDiff. It enforces spatial distance constraints between atomic nuclei and auxiliary mesh points placed on a spherical surface around each atom, approximating van der Waals boundaries to reduce atomic collisions. We quantitatively evaluate NucleusDiff using the CrossDocked2020 dataset and a COVID-19 therapeutic target, demonstrating that NucleusDiff reduces collision rate by up to 100.00% and enhances binding affinity by up to 22.16%, surpassing state-of-the-art models for structure-based drug design. We also provide qualitative analysis through manifold sampling, visually confirming the effectiveness of NucleusDiff in reducing atomic collisions and improving binding affinities.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".