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
The Molecular Basis of G Protein–Coupled Receptor Activation
Weis, W. I., & Kobilka, B. K. (2018) · Annual Review of Biochemistry · doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-060614-033910 · Cited by 1,227
Correlated mutations and residue contacts in proteins
Göbel, U., Sander, C., Schneider, R., & Valencia, A. (1994) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.340180402 · Cited by 863
Protein structure prediction from sequence variation
Marks, D. S., Hopf, T. A., & Sander, C. (2012) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2419 · Cited by 622
Zhang, C., Freddolino, L., & Zhang, Y. (2017) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkx366 · Cited by 606
Distance-based protein folding powered by deep learning
Xu, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1821309116 · Cited by 401
Defining a new nomenclature for the structures of active and inactive kinases
Modi, V., & Dunbrack, R. L. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1814279116 · Cited by 367
A threading-based method (FINDSITE) for ligand-binding site prediction and functional annotation
Brylinski, M., & Skolnick, J. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0707684105 · Cited by 333
Self-citationTHE CLASSIFICATION AND ORIGINS OF PROTEIN FOLDING PATTERNS
Chothia, C., & Finkelstein, A. V. (1990) · Annual Review of Biochemistry · doi:10.1146/annurev.bi.59.070190.005043 · Cited by 311
Steered molecular dynamics simulations of force-induced protein domain unfolding
Lu, H. J., & Schulten, K. J. (1999) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0134(19990601)35:4 · Cited by 306
Self-citationThe protein structure prediction problem could be solved using the current PDB library
Zhang, Y., & Skolnick, J. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0407152101 · Cited by 297
Self-citationConformational states dynamically populated by a kinase determine its function
Xie, T., Saleh, T., Rossi, P., & Kalodimos, C. G. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abc2754 · Cited by 266
MONSSTER: a method for folding globular proteins with a small number of distance restraints
Skolnick, J., Koliński, A., & Ortíz, Á. R. (1997) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1996.0720 · Cited by 255
Self-citationGoodsell, D. S., Sanner, M. F., Olson, A. J., & Forli, S. (2020) · Protein Science · doi:10.1002/pro.3934 · Cited by 249
Cryptic binding sites on proteins: definition, detection, and druggability
Vajda, S., Beglov, D., Wakefield, A., Egbert, M. E., & Whitty, A. (2018) · Current Opinion in Chemical Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2018.05.003 · Cited by 215
Olmea, O., & Valencia, A. (1997) · Folding and Design · doi:10.1016/s1359-0278(97)00060-6 · Cited by 203
On the origin and highly likely completeness of single-domain protein structures
Zhang, Y., Hubner, I. A., Arakaki, A. K., Shakhnovich, E., & Skolnick, J. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0509379103 · Cited by 197
Self-citationLi, Y., Hu, J., Zhang, C., Yu, D.-J., & Zhang, Y. (2019) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz291 · Cited by 158
Gao, M., & Skolnick, J. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1012820107 · Cited by 139
Self-citationFr-TM-align: a new protein structural alignment method based on fragment alignments and the TM-score
Pandit, S. B., & Skolnick, J. (2008) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-9-531 · Cited by 138
Self-citationComprehensive prediction of drug-protein interactions and side effects for the human proteome
Zhou, H., Gao, M., & Skolnick, J. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep11090 · Cited by 138
Self-citationA search for the most stable folds of protein chains
Finkelstein, A. V., & Reva, B. A. (1991) · Nature · doi:10.1038/351497a0 · Cited by 135
Protein Conformational Populations and Functionally Relevant Substates
Ramanathan, A., Savol, A., Burger, V., Chennubhotla, C. S., & Agarwal, P. K. (2014) · Accounts of Chemical Research · doi:10.1021/ar400084s · Cited by 110
iAlign: a method for the structural comparison of protein–protein interfaces
Gao, M., & Skolnick, J. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq404 · Cited by 98
Self-citationAb Initio Protein Structure Prediction Using Chunk-TASSER
Zhou, H., & Skolnick, J. (2007) · Biophysical Journal · doi:10.1529/biophysj.107.109959 · Cited by 88
Self-citationHow Do Molecular Dynamics Data Complement Static Structural Data of GPCRs
Torrens‐Fontanals, M., Stępniewski, T. M., Aranda-García, D., Morales-Pastor, A., Medel-Lacruz, B., & Selent, J. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21165933 · Cited by 68
Lakkaraju, S. K., Yu, W., Raman, E. P., Hershfeld, A. V., Fang, L., Deshpande, D. A., & MacKerell, A. D. (2015) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci500729k · Cited by 66
DESTINI: A deep-learning approach to contact-driven protein structure prediction
Gao, M., Zhou, H., & Skolnick, J. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-40314-1 · Cited by 61
Self-citationChSeq : A database of chameleon sequences
Li, W., Kinch, L. N., Karplus, P. A., & Grishin, N. V. (2015) · Protein Science · doi:10.1002/pro.2689 · Cited by 58
Ortíz, Á. R., Koliński, A., & Skolnick, J. (1998) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.95.3.1020 · Cited by 56
Self-citationDeepDist: real-value inter-residue distance prediction with deep residual convolutional network
Wu, T., Guo, Z., Hou, J., & Cheng, J. (2021) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/s12859-021-03960-9 · Cited by 55
Predicting the helix packing of globular proteins by self‐correcting distance geometry
Mumenthaler, C., & Braun, W. A. (1995) · Protein Science · doi:10.1002/pro.5560040506 · Cited by 50
Template‐based protein structure prediction in CASP11 and retrospect of I‐TASSER in the last decade
Yang, J., Zhang, W., He, B., Walker, S. E., Zhang, H., Govindarajoo, B., Virtanen, J., Xue, Z., Shen, H., & Zhang, Y. (2015) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.24918 · Cited by 50
Recovering physical potentials from a model protein databank
Mullinax, J. W., & Noid, W. G. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1006428107 · Cited by 50
Protein tertiary structure prediction and refinement using deep learning and Rosetta in CASP14
Anishchenko, I. V., Baek, M., Park, H., Hiranuma, N., Kim, D. E., Dauparas, J., Mansoor, S., Humphreys, I. R., & Baker, D. A. (2021) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.26194 · Cited by 50
Knowledge-based potentials for protein folding: what can we learn from known protein structures?
Godzik, A. (1996) · Structure · doi:10.1016/s0969-2126(96)00041-x · Cited by 45
Chen, C., Wu, T., Guo, Z., & Cheng, J. (2021) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.26052 · Cited by 44
Zhou, H., Cao, H., & Skolnick, J. (2018) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00309 · Cited by 39
Self-citationZhou, H., Cao, H., Matyunina, L., Shelby, M., Cassels, L., McDonald, J. F., & Skolnick, J. (2020) · Molecular Pharmaceutics · doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.9b01248 · Cited by 39
Self-citationTemplate‐based protein structure modeling using TASSERVMT
Zhou, H., & Skolnick, J. (2011) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.23183 · Cited by 38
Self-citationPredicting binding sites from unbound versus bound protein structures
Clark, J. J., Orban, Z. J., & Carlson, H. A. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-72906-7 · Cited by 36
Skolnick, J., Zhou, H., & Brylinski, M. (2012) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp211052j · Cited by 35
Self-citationChen, J., Wang, W., Sun, H., Pang, L., & Bao, H. (2021) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104485 · Cited by 35
RCSB Protein Data Bank 1D tools and services
Segura, J., Rose, Y., Westbrook, J., Burley, S. K., & Duarte, J. M. (2020) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa1012 · Cited by 32
FRAGSITE: A Fragment-Based Approach for Virtual Ligand Screening
Zhou, H., Cao, H., & Skolnick, J. (2021) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01160 · Cited by 32
Self-citationImproving protein tertiary structure prediction by deep learning and distance prediction in CASP14
Liu, J., Wu, T., Guo, Z., Hou, J., & Cheng, J. (2022) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.26186 · Cited by 32
Are protein-protein interfaces special regions on a protein’s surface?
Tonddast-Navaei, S., & Skolnick, J. (2015) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.4937428 · Cited by 31
Self-citationNeural network system for the evaluation of side-chain packing in protein structures
Milik, M., Koliński, A., & Skolnick, J. (1995) · Protein Engineering Design and Selection · doi:10.1093/protein/8.3.225 · Cited by 21
Self-citationThe role of local versus nonlocal physicochemical restraints in determining protein native structure
Skolnick, J., & Gao, M. (2021) · Current Opinion in Structural Biology · doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2020.10.008 · Cited by 21
Self-citationA novel sequence alignment algorithm based on deep learning of the protein folding code
Gao, M., & Skolnick, J. (2021) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa810 · Cited by 18
Self-citationA General Framework to Learn Tertiary Structure for Protein Sequence Characterization
Gao, M., & Skolnick, J. (2021) · Frontiers in Bioinformatics · doi:10.3389/fbinf.2021.689960 · Cited by 7
Self-citation
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
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
