The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 33 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function
Open accessAbstract
AlphaFold 2 (AF2) was the star of CASP14, the last biannual structure prediction experiment. Using novel deep learning, AF2 predicted the structures of many difficult protein targets at or near experimental resolution. Here, we present our perspective of why AF2 works and show that it is a very sophisticated fold recognition algorithm that exploits the completeness of the library of single domain PDB structures. It has also learned local side chain packing rearrangements that enable it to refine proteins to high resolution. The benefits and limitations of its ability to predict the structures of many more proteins at or close to atomic detail are discussed.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This Viewpoint argues that AlphaFold 2 (AF2) succeeds mainly as a sophisticated fold-recognition algorithm that exploits the near-completeness of the single-domain PDB structure library, plus learned local side-chain packing refinement. It also assesses AF2’s human-exome coverage and discusses implications and limits for inferring protein function, ligand binding, and phenotype.
Key findings
- AF2 often produced models with TM-score > 0.9, while MSA-based methods plateau around TM-score 0.85; TM-score > 0.85 indicates both global fold and details are correct.
- In human exome predictions, AF2 confidence score correlated with TM-score at 0.67. For low-quality models, only 10% had a closest template with TM-score ≥ 0.55; for good models, 53%; for high-accuracy models, 86%. These trends held with a current PDB library of almost 90,000 structures clustered at 70% sequence identity.
- Comparing 26,996 consensus human exome sequences, TASSER-VMT predicted at least one domain with TM-score > 0.4 for 89% of sequences; AF2 had confidence >70 for 67.4% and >60 for 86.9%. AF2 added 8.7% of human sequences with confidence >60, and the union provided confident models for at least one domain for 97.5% of human sequences.
- For ligand homology modeling, low-resolution structures are adequate, with at most a 20% improvement in enrichment factor going from lower resolution (TM-score > 0.4) to crystal structures, because binding sites are generally the most accurately predicted parts of a protein’s structure.
Methods
- This is a Viewpoint/perspective, not a new AF2 training study. It interprets AF2’s mechanism using prior deep-learning work and structural analyses.
- The authors used TM-align to generate structural alignments of AF2-predicted human proteins to a 41,000-member PDB library from 2016, and also examined results with a current PDB library of almost 90,000 structures clustered at 70% sequence identity.
- They analyzed correlations between AF2 confidence scores and TM-score/contact order, binned confidence as <70, 70–90, and >90, and compared AF2 coverage with TASSER-VMT on 26,996 consensus human exome sequences.
Limitations
- The paper states that structure alone does not provide biochemical function and cannot predict phenotypical function, which often depends on complex interactions among proteins, RNA, DNA, and metabolites.
- The paper states that AF2 predicts a particular conformational state; if an active conformation is predicted, it may not work for targeting the inactive state. It also notes that AF2 was trained on proteins with particular ions and might not accurately represent binding pockets under other conditions.
- The paper states that much work remains to establish AF2’s strengths and limitations, including whether it can predict effects of missense mutations, splice variants, chameleon sequences, cryptic pockets, and allosteric transitions. Evident from the text: the analysis is a perspective focused on the human exome and single-domain PDB completeness, and multimeric/multi-domain prediction is discussed as likely but not fully established.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
16 Not checked yet · 10 Own interpretation · 6 No basis given · 5 Own result
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For some multiple domain CASP14 targets, AF2 made high quality structure predictions.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, the Pearson correlation coefficient of the average confidence score per protein with contact order is 0.28—a weak correlation of model quality with whether the fold has a sequential or nonsequential arrangement of secondary structural elements.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Having selected an approximate fold, AF2 sometimes refines the structure to experimental accuracy, with TM-scores greater than 0.9.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results are preserved when the current PDB library of almost 90,000 structures clustered at a sequence identity cutoff of 70% is used, with a shift toward higher TM-scores for the various prediction confidence levels.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correlation coefficient of AF2’s confidence score with TM-score is 0.67.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“then for low quality predicted structures only 10% of proteins have a closest template in the template library with a TM-score ≥ 0.55.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“There are 26,996 consensus human exome sequences between AF2 and a previously predicted set using TASSER-VMT.44”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using the same domain partitioning as TASSER-VMT, AF2 provides an additional 8.7% of human sequences with a confidence score greater than 60.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The union of approaches provides confident models for at least one domain for 97.5% of human sequences.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“While AF2 generates significantly better structure predictions than existing methods on average, for the human exome, it is worthwhile to examine how many additional sequences have confident models compared to the prior art.44”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 11
- Probably not a substantial claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, 53% of proteins with good models and 86% with high accuracy models have a TM-score ≥ 0.55.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“AF2 has a confidence score greater than 70 for 67.4% of sequences, while 86.9% have a confidence score greater than 60.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In practice, the structural space of protein–protein interfaces is small (<1000 structurally distinct interfaces),41,42 with nothing special about protein–protein interfaces.43”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The DESTI-NI convolutional neural network (CNN) deep learning approach to structure prediction23 demonstrated that deep learning learned the contact map patterns of secondary structure packing and eliminated nonphysical, isolated residue pairs.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we present our perspective of why AF2 works and show that it is a very sophisticated fold recognition algorithm that exploits the completeness of the library of single domain PDB structures.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The reason that SAdLSA trained on helical proteins works for β-proteins is that the global topology of β-proteins is in the training set;2,12,13 the chain contour of helical proteins provides a globally correct fold for β-proteins.13”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, structure alone does not provide the biochemical function of the protein nor can AF2 predict phenotypical function which is often the result of the complex interplay of proteins, RNA, DNA, and metabolites.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Contrary to popular belief that high resolution structures are required, using ligand homology modeling,45–48 low resolution structures are adequate, with at most a 20% improvement in enrichment factor on going from lower resolution (TM-score > 0.4) to crystal structures.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Binding sites are generally the most accurately predicted parts of a protein's structure.
In the paper
“How inclusion of higher quality structures improves the ability to predict drug side effects, efficacy64 and the role of missense variations in non-Mendelian diseases depends on accurately characterizing the interplay of many molecular players.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [64] source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even though AF2 can accurately predict backbone and side chain conformations, it is for a particular conformational state.”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Importantly, while knowledge of a protein’s structure alone does not provide its biochemical, much less, phenotypical effects, structure can be a component.64”
§ AlphaFold 2: Why It Works and Its Implications for Understanding the Relationships of Protein Sequence, Structure, and Function > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [64] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Binding sites are generally the most accurately predicted parts of a protein's structure.
“The reason is simple; binding sites are generally the most accurately predicted parts of a protein’s structure.”
The paper relies on this without support.
AF2 was trained on proteins having particular ions.
“Since AF2 was trained on proteins having particular ions, for example, it might not provide an accurate representation of the binding pocket under other conditions.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“two key factors contributing to the success of AF2 are the completeness of the structural space of single-domain proteins and an abundance of sequences in sequence databases3.”
From AF2Complex predicts direct physical interactions in multimeric proteins with deep learning (2022) · cites this paper as [3]
In the citing paper
“Taken together, it is very likely that the neural network models trained for single-chain structure prediction have already learned the representations necessary to model protein complexes made of multiple single-chain proteins3.”
From AF2Complex predicts direct physical interactions in multimeric proteins with deep learning (2022) · cites this paper as [3]
Citations
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764
I-TASSER: a unified platform for automated protein structure and function prediction
Roy, A., Küçükural, A., & Zhang, Y. (2010) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2010.5 · Cited by 6,212
Accurate prediction of protein structures and interactions using a 3-track network
Baek, M., DiMaio, F., Anishchenko, I., Dauparas, J., Ovchinnikov, S., Lee, G. R., Wang, J., Cong, Q., Kinch, L. N., Schaeffer, R. D., et al. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.06.14.448402 · Cited by 5,549
I-TASSER server for protein 3D structure prediction
Zhang, Y. (2008) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-9-40 · Cited by 5,124
TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score
Zhang, Y. (2005) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gki524 · Cited by 3,774
Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning
Senior, A. W., Evans, R., Jumper, J., Kirkpatrick, J., Sifre, L., Green, T., Qin, C., Žídek, A., Nelson, A. W. R., Bridgland, A., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1923-7 · Cited by 3,378
Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome
Tunyasuvunakool, K., Adler, J., Wu, Z., Green, T., Zielinski, M., Žídek, A., Bridgland, A., Cowie, A., Meyer, C., Laydon, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03828-1 · Cited by 3,025
A Method to Identify Protein Sequences That Fold into a Known Three-Dimensional Structure
Bowie, J. U., Lüthy, R., & Eisenberg, D. (1991) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1853201 · Cited by 2,851
Database of homology‐derived protein structures and the structural meaning of sequence alignment
Sander, C., & Schneider, R. (1991) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.340090107 · Cited by 1,646
Improved protein structure prediction using predicted interresidue orientations
Yang, J., Anishchenko, I., Park, H., Peng, Z., Ovchinnikov, S., & Baker, D. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1914677117 · Cited by 1,421
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Before and after AlphaFold2: An overview of protein structure prediction
Bertoline, L. M. F., Lima, A. N., Krieger, J. E., & Teixeira, S. K. (2023) · Frontiers in Bioinformatics · doi:10.3389/fbinf.2023.1120370 · Cited by 330
AF2Complex predicts direct physical interactions in multimeric proteins with deep learning
Gao, M., Nakajima An, D., Parks, J. M., & Skolnick, J. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-29394-2 · Cited by 252
Self-citationProteins Plus : a comprehensive collection of web-based molecular modeling tools
Stierand, K., Diedrich, K., Ehrt, C., Flachsenberg, F., Graef, J., Sieg, J., Penner, P., Poppinga, M., Ungethüm, A., & Rarey, M. (2022) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkac305 · Cited by 225
The power and pitfalls of AlphaFold2 for structure prediction beyond rigid globular proteins
Agarwal, V., & McShan, A. C. (2024) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/s41589-024-01638-w · Cited by 155
Comprehensive Survey of Consensus Docking for High-Throughput Virtual Screening
Blanes‐Mira, C., Fernández-Aguado, P., de Andrés-López, J., Fernández-Carvajal, A. M., Ferrer-Montiel, A. V., & Fernandez-Ballester, G. J. (2022) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules28010175 · Cited by 113
A cardiologist’s guide to machine learning in cardiovascular disease prognosis prediction
Kresoja, K., Unterhuber, M., Wachter, R., Thiele, H., & Lurz, P. C. (2023) · Basic Research in Cardiology · doi:10.1007/s00395-023-00982-7 · Cited by 79
Proteins with alternative folds reveal blind spots in AlphaFold-based protein structure prediction
Chakravarty, D., Lee, M., & Porter, L. L. (2025) · Current Opinion in Structural Biology · doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2024.102973 · Cited by 76
Predicting protein flexibility with AlphaFold
Ma, P., Li, D., & Brüschweiler, R. (2023) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.26471 · Cited by 72
Villanueva‐Flores, F., Sanchez-Villamil, J. I., & Garcia-Atutxa, I. (2025) · npj Vaccines · doi:10.1038/s41541-025-01258-y · Cited by 70
Quality Assessment of Selected Protein Structures Derived from Homology Modeling and AlphaFold
Binbay, F. A., Rathod, D., George, A. A. P., & Imhof, D. (2023) · Pharmaceuticals · doi:10.3390/ph16121662 · Cited by 64
Vincenzi, M., Mercurio, F. A., & Leone, M. (2024) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms25031798 · Cited by 63
Medical Ethics of Large Language Models in Medicine
Ong, J. C. L., Chang, Y., Wasswa, W., Butte, A. J., Shah, N. H., Chew, L. S. T., Liu, N., Doshi‐Velez, F., Lu, W., Savulescu, J., et al. (2024) · NEJM AI · doi:10.1056/aira2400038 · Cited by 62
Dlamini, Z., Skepu, A., Kim, N., Mkhabele, M., Khanyile, R., Molefi, T., Mbatha, S. Z., Damane, B. P., Mulaudzi, T. V., Mabongo, M., et al. (2022) · Informatics in Medicine Unlocked · doi:10.1016/j.imu.2022.100965 · Cited by 61
Deep learning in bioinformatics
Yousef, M., & Allmer, J. (2023) · TURKISH JOURNAL OF BIOLOGY · doi:10.55730/1300-0152.2671 · Cited by 63
High-resolution cryo-EM structure of the Pseudomonas bacteriophage E217
Li, F., Hou, C.-F. D., Lokareddy, R. K., Yang, R., Forti, F., Briani, F., & Cingolani, G. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39756-z · Cited by 52
HiSIF-DTA: A Hierarchical Semantic Information Fusion Framework for Drug-Target Affinity Prediction
Bi, X., Zhang, S., Ma, W., Jiang, H., & Wei, Z. (2023) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2023.3334239 · Cited by 49
Xia, Y., Zhao, K., Liu, D., Zhou, X., & Zhang, G. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-05610-7 · Cited by 48
Zhao, K., Xia, Y., Zhang, F., Zhou, X., Li, S. Z., & Zhang, G. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-04605-8 · Cited by 48
Gomes, P. D. S. F. C., Gomes, D. E. B., & Bernardi, R. C. (2022) · Frontiers in Bioinformatics · doi:10.3389/fbinf.2022.983306 · Cited by 42
Ghaffar, S. A., Tahir, H., Muhammad, S., Shahid, M., Naqqash, T., Faisal, M., Albekairi, T. H., Alshammari, A., Albekairi, N. A., & Manzoor, I. (2024) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2024.1380732 · Cited by 40
Domain loss enabled evolution of novel functions in the snake three-finger toxin gene superfamily
Koludarov, I., Senoner, T., Jackson, T., Dashevsky, D., Heinzinger, M., Aird, S. D., & Rost, B. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-40550-0 · Cited by 38
Mapiour, M., & Abdelrasoul, A. (2023) · Journal of Composites Science · doi:10.3390/jcs7010028 · Cited by 39
Agajanian, S., Alshahrani, M., Bai, F., Tao, P., & Verkhivker, G. M. (2023) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01634 · Cited by 37
Rational and mechanistic approaches for improving biocatalyst performance
Phintha, A., & Chaiyen, P. (2022) · Chem Catalysis · doi:10.1016/j.checat.2022.09.026 · Cited by 38
LRRK2 Structure-Based Activation Mechanism and Pathogenesis
Zhang, X., & Kortholt, A. (2023) · Biomolecules · doi:10.3390/biom13040612 · Cited by 34
Puente-Lelièvre, C., Malik, A. J., Douglas, J., Ascher, D. B., Baker, M. A. B., Allison, J. R., Poole, A. M., Lundin, D., Fullmer, M. S., Bouckaert, R., et al. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.12.12.571181 · Cited by 36
Natural Language Processing Methods for the Study of Protein–Ligand Interactions
Michels, J., Bandarupalli, R., Akbari, A. A., Le, T., Xiao, H. Y., Li, J., & Hom, E. F. Y. (2025) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.4c01907 · Cited by 35
Drug Discovery in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Transformative Target-Based Approaches
Patne, A. Y., Dhulipala, S. M., Lawless, W., Prakash, S., Mohapatra, S. S., & Mohapatra, S. (2024) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms252212233 · Cited by 32
Lazou, M., Khan, O., Nguyen, T., Padhorny, D., Kozakov, D., Joseph‐McCarthy, D., & Vajda, S. (2024) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2412719121 · Cited by 37
Protein multiple conformations prediction using multi-objective evolution algorithm
Hou, M.-H., Jin, S.-R., Cui, X.-Y., Peng, C.-X., Zhao, K.-L., Song, L., & Zhang, G.-J. (2023) · doi:10.1101/2023.04.21.537776 · Cited by 29
Dynamics of the mammalian pyruvate dehydrogenase complex revealed by in-situ structural analysis
Wang, C., Ma, C., Xu, Y., Chang, S., Wu, H., Yan, C., Chen, J., Wu, Y., An, S., Xu, J., et al. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-56171-8 · Cited by 27
Wang, J., Zhang, M., Cui, X., Gao, X., Sun, W., Ge, X., Zhang, Y., Guo, X., Han, J., Zhou, L., et al. (2022) · Microbiology Spectrum · doi:10.1128/spectrum.03084-22 · Cited by 27
Computational Chemistry for the Identification of Lead Compounds for Radiotracer Development
Hsieh, C., Giannakoulias, S. G., Petersson, E. J., & Mach, R. H. (2023) · Pharmaceuticals · doi:10.3390/ph16020317 · Cited by 27
Edmunds, N. S., Genc, A. G., & McGuffin, L. J. (2024) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btae491 · Cited by 30
Mass Spectrometry Structural Proteomics Enabled by Limited Proteolysis and Cross‐Linking
Lu, H., Zhu, Z., Fields, L. G., Zhang, H., & Li, L. (2024) · Mass Spectrometry Reviews · doi:10.1002/mas.21908 · Cited by 28
Large language models facilitating modern molecular biology and novel drug development
Liu, X., Lü, Z., Wang, T., & Liu, F. (2024) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2024.1458739 · Cited by 28
Wang, X., Chen, X., Wang, Z.-J., Zhuang, M., Zhong, L., Fu, C., Garcia, R., Müller, R., Zhang, Y., Yan, J., et al. (2023) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.3c06014 · Cited by 26
AI-driven innovation in antibody-drug conjugate design
Noriega, H. A., & Wang, X. S. (2025) · Frontiers in Drug Discovery · doi:10.3389/fddsv.2025.1628789 · Cited by 26
Chen, P., Wang, R., Chen, G., An, B., Liu, M., Wang, Q., & Tao, Y. (2022) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153639 · Cited by 23
Bishop, Ö. T., Musyoka, T. M., & Barozi, V. (2022) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2022.167610 · Cited by 23
Yan, W., Li, Z., Pian, C., & Wu, Y. (2022) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbac425 · Cited by 23
Assessment of AlphaFold2 for Human Proteins via Residue Solvent Exposure
Bæk, K. T., & Kepp, K. P. (2022) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00243 · Cited by 23
Sun, Y., Jia, X., Chen, D., Fu, Q., Chen, J., Yang, W., Yang, H., & Xu, X. (2023) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms24065762 · Cited by 22
Adiyaman, R., Edmunds, N. S., Genc, A. G., Alharbi, S. M. A., & McGuffin, L. J. (2023) · Bioinformatics Advances · doi:10.1093/bioadv/vbad078 · Cited by 23
AlphaFold2 in Molecular Discovery
Nunes‐Alves, A., & Merz, K. M. (2023) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.3c01459 · Cited by 22
Machine Learning for Chemical Looping: Recent Advances and Prospects
Song, Y., Teng, S., Fang, D., Lu, Y., Chen, Z., Xiao, R., & Zeng, D. (2024) · Energy & Fuels · doi:10.1021/acs.energyfuels.4c02110 · Cited by 21
Multimeric protein interaction and complex prediction: Structure, dynamics and function
Lu, D., Yu, S., Huang, Y., & Gong, X. (2025) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2025.05.009 · Cited by 23
AF3Complex yields improved structural predictions of protein complexes
Feldman, J. D., & Skolnick, J. (2025) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btaf432 · Cited by 20
Self-citationMani, H., Chang, C., Hsu, H., Yang, C.-H., Yen, J.-H., & Liou, J.-W. (2023) · Bioengineering · doi:10.3390/bioengineering10091004 · Cited by 20
Integrative structural analysis of Pseudomonas phage DEV reveals a genome ejection motor
Lokareddy, R. K., Hou, C.-F. D., Forti, F., Iglesias, S. M., Li, F., Pavlenok, M., Horner, D. S., Niederweis, M., Briani, F., & Cingolani, G. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-52752-1 · Cited by 18
Pullin, J., Rodríguez-Celma, J., Franceschetti, M., Mundy, J. E. A., Svistunenko, D. A., Bradley, J. M., Le Brun, N. E., & Balk, J. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-58853-9 · Cited by 18
Decentring the discoverer: how AI helps us rethink scientific discovery
Clark, E., & Khosrowi, D. (2022) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-022-03902-9 · Cited by 18
AlphaFold2 Update and Perspectives
Tourlet, S., Radjasandirane, R., Diharce, J., & de Brevern, A. G. (2023) · BioMedInformatics · doi:10.3390/biomedinformatics3020025 · Cited by 18
Tuly, J. A., Ma, H., Lee, H., Song, J., Parvez, A., Saqib, M. N., Yaseen, W., & Zhang, X. (2023) · Food Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.135854 · Cited by 16
TATDN2 resolution of R-loops is required for survival of BRCA1-mutant cancer cells
Jaiswal, A. S., Dutta, A., Srinivasan, G., Yuan, Y., Zhou, D., Shaheen, M. F., Sadideen, D. T., Kirby, A., Williamson, E. A., Gupta, Y. K., et al. (2023) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkad952 · Cited by 16
Huang, J., Tang, G. Q., Liu, N., Li, X., & Lu, S. (2025) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2025.104466 · Cited by 15
Evaluation of Myocilin Variant Protein Structures Modeled by AlphaFold2
Ng, T. K., Ji, J., Liu, Q., Yao, Y., Wang, W., Cao, Y., Chen, C., Lin, J., Dong, G., Cen, L., et al. (2023) · Biomolecules · doi:10.3390/biom14010014 · Cited by 15
Takaya, D. (2024) · Chemical and Pharmaceutical Bulletin · doi:10.1248/cpb.c23-00839 · Cited by 17
Xiao, X., Sarma, S., Menegatti, S., Crook, N., Magness, S. T., & Hall, C. K. (2021) · ACS Chemical Biology · doi:10.1021/acschembio.1c00743 · Cited by 15
Islam, S. I., Ahmed, S. S., Habib, N., Ferdous, M. A., Sanjida, S., & Mou, M. J. (2023) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16383 · Cited by 14
Wang, F., Jiang, S., & Li, J. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15105667 · Cited by 14
Using machine‐learning‐driven approaches to boost hot‐spot's knowledge
Rosário‐Ferreira, N., Bonvin, A. M. J. J., & Moreira, I. S. (2022) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational Molecular Science · doi:10.1002/wcms.1602 · Cited by 14
Novel computational pipelines in antiviral structure‑based drug design (Review)
Diakou, I., Papakonstantinou, E., Papageorgiou, L., Pierouli, K., Dragoumani, K., Spandidos, D. A., Bacopoulou, F., Chrousos, G. P., Eliopoulos, E., & Vlachakis, D. (2022) · Biomedical Reports · doi:10.3892/br.2022.1580 · Cited by 13
The physics-AI dialogue in drug design
Vargas-Rosales, P. A., & Caflisch, A. (2025) · RSC Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1039/d4md00869c · Cited by 15
Bakker, M. J., Sørensen, H. V., & Skepö, M. (2024) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.3c00971 · Cited by 13
Biophysical investigation of interactions between SARS‐CoV ‐2 spike protein and neuropilin‐1
Hou, D., Cao, W., Kim, S., Cui, X., Ziarnik, M., Im, W., & Zhang, X. H. (2023) · Protein Science · doi:10.1002/pro.4773 · Cited by 13
Enhanced thermostability of nattokinase by rational design of disulfide bond
Yu, K., Chen, L., Tang, Y., Ma, A., Zhu, W., Wang, H., Tang, X., Li, Y., & Li, J. (2025) · Microbial Cell Factories · doi:10.1186/s12934-025-02681-5 · Cited by 12
Impacts of a Zwitterionic Peptide on its Fusion Protein
McMullen, P., Fang, L., Qiao, Q., Shao, Q., & Jiang, S. (2022) · Bioconjugate Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.2c00176 · Cited by 12
Hasan, M., Nishat, Z. S., Hasan, M. S., Hossain, T., & Ghosh, A. (2024) · Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.bbrep.2024.101677 · Cited by 11
Harihar, B., Saravanan, K. M., Gromiha, M. M., & Selvaraj, S. (2024) · Molecular Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s12033-024-01119-4 · Cited by 13
Regulation and induction of fungal secondary metabolites: a comprehensive review
Prakash, S., Kumari, H., Sinha, M., & Kumar, A. (2025) · Archives of Microbiology · doi:10.1007/s00203-025-04386-0 · Cited by 11
Structural insights into Beclin 1 interactions with it's regulators for autophagy modulation
Sarmadhikari, D., & Asthana, S. (2025) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2025.06.044 · Cited by 13
An agnostic analysis of the human AlphaFold2 proteome using local protein conformations
de Brevern, A. G. (2022) · Biochimie · doi:10.1016/j.biochi.2022.11.009 · Cited by 12
More than just pattern recognition: Prediction of uncommon protein structure features by AI methods
Herzberg, O., & Moult, J. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2221745120 · Cited by 11
Cryptic Oxidative Transamination of Hydroxynaphthoquinone in Natural Product Biosynthesis
Noguchi, T., Isogai, S., Terada, T., Nishiyama, M., & Kuzuyama, T. (2022) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.1c13074 · Cited by 11
de Rezende, S. B., de Lima, L. R., Macedo, M. L. R., Franco, O. L., & Cardoso, M. H. E. S. (2023) · Current Bioinformatics · doi:10.2174/1574893618666230412080702 · Cited by 10
Miller, L. G., Demny, M., Tamamis, P., & Contreras, L. M. (2023) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2023.06.018 · Cited by 10
Cutting-edge deep-learning based tools for metagenomic research
Karin, E. L., & Steinegger, M. (2025) · National Science Review · doi:10.1093/nsr/nwaf056 · Cited by 10
Improving B-cell epitope prediction
Yu, H., Joseph‐McCarthy, D., & Vajda, S. (2025) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2025.104489 · Cited by 11
Denkhaus, L., Siffert, F., & Einsle, O. (2023) · FEMS Microbiology Letters · doi:10.1093/femsle/fnad068 · Cited by 9
Alanazi, W. T., Meng, D., & Pollastri, G. (2025) · Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2025.04.005 · Cited by 9
Snake venom-derived peptides as anticancer candidates: Pioneering next-generation therapies
Almeida, J. R., Pinos-Tamayo, E. A., Mendes, B. D. S., Robles-Loaiza, A. A., Syahputra, R. A., Oliveira, A. G. S., & Ribeiro, R. I. M. D. A. (2025) · Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Reviews on Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.bbcan.2025.189479 · Cited by 9
Yin, T., Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Su, H., Duan, C., & Liu, J. (2026) · Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2026.1767821 · Cited by 9
Chakraborty, C., Bhattacharya, M., & Lee, S.-S. (2026) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2026.1739303 · Cited by 11
Cao, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, R., Sun, H., & Yan, Y. (2022) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms231911104 · Cited by 9
Wang, X., Wang, Z.-J., Dong, Z.-Q., Yan, Y., Zhang, Y., & Huo, L. (2023) · ACS Chemical Biology · doi:10.1021/acschembio.3c00135 · Cited by 9
Ko, S., Kim, J., Lim, J., Lee, S., Park, J. Y., Woo, J., Scott-Nevros, Z. K., Kim, J. R., Yoon, H., & Kim, D. (2023) · mSystems · doi:10.1128/msystems.00943-23 · Cited by 8
Artificial intelligence in protein-based detection and inhibition of AMR pathways
Sadhukhan, S., Bhattacharya, R., Bhattcharya, D., Sahana, S., Pradhan, B., Pandit, S., Gill, H. S., Rajeev, M., Nag, M., & Lahiri, D. (2025) · Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design · doi:10.1007/s10822-025-00710-4 · Cited by 10
Gene duplication captures morph-specific promoter usage in the evolution of aphid wing dimorphisms
Ziabari, O. S., Liu, F., Deem, K. D., Liu, X., Kholwadwala, A., & Brisson, J. A. (2025) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2420893122 · Cited by 8
Arenas, N. E., Pieffet, G. P., Rocha‐Roa, C., & Guerrero, M. I. (2022) · Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · doi:10.1590/0074-02760220025 · Cited by 8
Dhiman, A., & Purohit, R. (2023) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2023.106951 · Cited by 8
High-resolution Cryo-EM Analysis of the Therapeutic Pseudomonas Phage Pa223
Hou, C.-F. D., Bellis, N., Lokareddy, R. K., Branston, S., Reid, J., Geier, R., Soriaga, A., Sim, L., Kyme, P., Birx, D. L., et al. (2025) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2025.169386 · Cited by 7
Ma, X., & Si, D. (2025) · Computational Biology and Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.compbiolchem.2025.108494 · Cited by 8
Neuropsychopharmacology in the era of artificial intelligence and biomolecule prediction software
Garcia-Reyes, R. A., Massó-Quiñones, L. N., Ruy, H., & Castro, D. C. (2025) · NPP—Digital Psychiatry and Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s44277-025-00038-9 · Cited by 7
Allemailem, K. S. (2025) · Pharmaceuticals · doi:10.3390/ph18091258 · Cited by 7
Bias in the AlphaFold3 prediction of ligand-induced domain motion in enzymes
Yu, H., Bekar-Cesaretli, A. A., Lazou, M., Kozakov, D., Joseph‐McCarthy, D., & Vajda, S. (2026) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2530709123 · Cited by 7
Murmu, S., & Archak, S. (2023) · Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics · doi:10.1080/07391102.2023.2228907 · Cited by 7
Khatua, S., Roy, A., Sen, P., & Ray, S. (2023) · Gene · doi:10.1016/j.gene.2023.147820 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Skolnick, J., Gao, M., Zhou, H., & Singh, S.
- Affiliations
- Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
- Twilight Design, 4 Adams Road, Kendall Park, New Jersey 08824, United States
- Corresponding author
- Skolnick, Jeffrey
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2021-09-29
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 4827-4831
- ISSN
- 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-960X
- PMC
- PMC8592092
- OpenAlex
- W3201869122
- Semantic Scholar
- 34ab2f845e0b6c1693a4fc92bf9593b32be0d803
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 12.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (GM-118039)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Structural Biology › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Keywords
- AlphaFold2, protein structure prediction, CASP14, deep learning, protein fold recognition, side-chain packing, sequence-structure-function relationships
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Amino Acid Sequence, Proteins, Protein Folding
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
