Cited by 93Protein Structure and DynamicsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Materials Science

Molecular Insights from Conformational Ensembles via Machine Learning

Open access
Fleetwood, Oliver, Kasimova, Marina A., Westerlund, Annie M., Delemotte, Lucie·2020·Biophysical Journal

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Biomolecular simulations are intrinsically high dimensional and generate noisy data sets of ever-increasing size. Extracting important features from the data is crucial for understanding the biophysical properties of molecular processes, but remains a big challenge. Machine learning (ML) provides powerful dimensionality reduction tools. However, such methods are often criticized as resembling black boxes with limited human-interpretable insight. We use methods from supervised and unsupervised ML to efficiently create interpretable maps of important features from molecular simulations. We benchmark the performance of several methods, including neural networks, random forests, and principal component analysis, using a toy model with properties reminiscent of macromolecular behavior. We then analyze three diverse biological processes: conformational changes within the soluble protein calmodulin, ligand binding to a G protein-coupled receptor, and activation of an ion channel voltage-sensor domain, unraveling features critical for signal transduction, ligand binding, and voltage sensing. This work demonstrates the usefulness of ML in understanding biomolecular states and demystifying complex simulations.

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 · 10.1016/j.bpj.2019.12.016

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fleetwood, O., Kasimova, M. A., Westerlund, A. M., & Delemotte, L.
Affiliations
Science for Life Laboratory (SE)
Corresponding author
Delemotte, Lucie
Venue
Biophysical Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-02
Volume
118
Issue
3
Pages
765-780
ISSN
0006-3495 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2994669396
Cited by
93
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biophysical Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Göran Gustafssons Stiftelse för Naturvetenskaplig och Medicinsk Forskning
  • Science for Life Laboratory
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
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
Keywords
conformational ensembles, molecular simulation, dimensionality reduction, model interpretability, calmodulin, G protein-coupled receptors, ligand binding, signal transduction, protein conformational change, feature extraction
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Humans, Protein Conformation, Proteins

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