Cited by 41Protein Structure and DynamicsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

Flexible protein–protein docking with a multitrack iterative transformer

Open access
Chu, Lee‐Shin, Ruffolo, Jeffrey A., Harmalkar, Ameya, Gray, Jeffrey J.·2024·Protein Science

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Conventional protein–protein docking algorithms usually rely on heavy candidate sampling and reranking, but these steps are time‐consuming and hinder applications that require high‐throughput complex structure prediction, for example, structure‐based virtual screening. Existing deep learning methods for protein–protein docking, despite being much faster, suffer from low docking success rates. In addition, they simplify the problem to assume no conformational changes within any protein upon binding (rigid docking). This assumption precludes applications when binding‐induced conformational changes play a role, such as allosteric inhibition or docking from uncertain unbound model structures. To address these limitations, we present GeoDock, a multitrack iterative transformer network to predict a docked structure from separate docking partners. Unlike deep learning models for protein structure prediction that input multiple sequence alignments, GeoDock inputs just the sequences and structures of the docking partners, which suits the tasks when the individual structures are given. GeoDock is flexible at the protein residue level, allowing the prediction of conformational changes upon binding. On the Database of Interacting Protein Structures (DIPS) test set, GeoDock achieves a 43% top‐1 success rate, outperforming all other tested methods. However, in the standard DIPS train/test splits, we discovered contamination of close homologs in the training set. After decontaminating the training set, the success rate is 31%. On the DB5.5 test set and a benchmark dataset of antibody–antigen complexes, GeoDock outperforms the deep learning models trained using the same dataset but falls behind most of the conventional methods and AlphaFold‐Multimer. GeoDock attains an average inference speed of under 1 s on a single GPU, enabling its application in large‐scale structure screening. Although binding‐induced conformational changes are still a challenge owing to limited training and evaluation data, our architecture sets up the foundation to capture this backbone flexibility. Code and a demonstration Jupyter notebook are available at https://github.com/Graylab/GeoDock .

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pro.4862

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Chu, L., Ruffolo, J. A., Harmalkar, A., & Gray, J. J.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Jeffrey J.
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-01-23
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
e4862-e4862
ISSN
  • 0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-896X
OpenAlex
W4390245367
Cited by
41
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 1
FWCI
3.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Protein Science (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM008403, R35GM141881, T32GM135131)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
protein-protein docking, flexible docking, structure-based virtual screening, immune complexes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review