Enhancing antibody-antigen interaction prediction with atomic flexibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antibodies are indispensable components of the immune system, known for their specific binding to antigens. Beyond their natural immunological functions, they are fundamental in developing vaccines and therapeutic interventions for infectious diseases. The complex architecture of antibodies, particularly their variable regions responsible for antigen recognition, presents significant challenges for computational modeling. Recent advancements in deep learning have markedly improved protein structure prediction; however, accurately modeling antibody-antigen (Ab-Ag) interactions remains challenging due to the inherent flexibility of antibodies and the dynamic nature of binding processes. In this study, we examine the use of predicted Local Distance Difference Test (pLDDT) scores as indicators of residue and side-chain flexibility to model Ab-Ag interactions through a fingerprint-based approach. We demonstrate the significance of flexibility in different antibody-specific tasks, enhancing the predictive accuracy of Ab-Ag interaction models by 4%, resulting in an AUC-ROC of 92%. In addition, we showcase state-of-the-art performance in paratope prediction. These results emphasize the importance of accounting for conformational flexibility in modeling antibody-antigen interactions and show that pLDDT can serve as a coarse proxy for these dynamic features. By optimizing antibody flexibility using pLDDT, they can be engineered to improve affinity or breadth for a specific target. This approach is particularly beneficial for addressing highly variable pathogens like HIV and SARS-CoV-2, as greater flexibility enhances tolerance to sequence variations in target antigens.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".