Boosting AlphaFold protein tertiary structure prediction through MSA engineering and extensive model sampling and ranking in CASP16
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold3 have revolutionized protein structure prediction by enabling high-accuracy structure predictions for most single-chain proteins. However, obtaining high-quality predictions for difficult targets with shallow or noisy multiple sequence alignments and complicated multi-domain architectures remains challenging. We present MULTICOM4, an integrative structure prediction system that uses diverse MSA generation, large-scale model sampling, and an ensemble model quality assessment strategy to improve model generation and ranking of AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold3. In the 16th Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction, our predictors built on MULTICOM4 ranked among the top out of 120 predictors in tertiary structure prediction and outperformed a standard AlphaFold3 predictor. Our best predictor achieved an average TM-score of 0.902 for 84 CASP16 domains, with top-1 predictions reaching high accuracy (TM-score>0.9) for 73.8% and correct folds (TM-score>0.5) for 97.6% of domains. For best-of-top-5 predictions, all domains were correctly folded. The results show that MSA engineering using different sequence databases, alignment tools, and domain segmentation along with extensive model sampling is critical to generate accurate structural models. Combining complementary QA methods with model clustering further improves ranking reliability. These advances provide practical strategies for modeling difficult single-chain proteins in structural biology and drug discovery.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
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 · see citing works
Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3
Abramson, J., Adler, J., Dunger, J., Evans, R., Green, T., Pritzel, A., Ronneberger, O., Willmore, L., Ballard, A. J., Bambrick, J., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07487-w · Cited by 15,861 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In2024,AlphaFold3 12 ,basedon a diffusion architecture 13 , further improved the prediction of protein structure and interactions between proteins and other molecules.”
Evolutionary-scale prediction of atomic level protein structure with a language model
Lin, Z., Akin, H., Rao, R., Hie, B., Zhu, Z., Lu, W., Smetanin, N., Verkuil, R., Kabeli, O., Shmueli, Y., et al. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.07.20.500902 · Cited by 5,523 · see citing works
Protein-level assembly increases protein sequence recovery from metagenomic samples manyfold
Steinegger, M., Mirdita, M., & Söding, J. (2019) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0437-4 · Cited by 445 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Liu, J., Neupane, P., & Cheng, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cheng, Jianlin
- Venue
- Communications Biology
- Published
- 2025-11-17
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1587-1587
- ISSN
- 2399-3642 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC12623963
- OpenAlex
- W4416291529
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Communications Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | National Institutes of Health (R01GM093123, R01GM146340)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Keywords
- protein tertiary structure prediction, AlphaFold2, AlphaFold3, model ranking, CASP16, multidomain proteins, model clustering, TM-score
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