The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rapid and interpretable protein contact map prediction using a pattern-matching strategy
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Protein sequence determines structure, function, and dynamics, yet the gap between sequenced proteins and experimentally determined structures continues to widen. While machine learning approaches like AlphaFold2 have transformed structural biology, they require substantial computational resources. Coevolution-based methods such as mutual information (MI) and direct coupling analysis (DCA), such as GREMLIN, offer alternatives but depend on extensive multiple sequence alignments with thousands of homologs. Here, we present a template-based pattern-matching approach that predicts protein contact maps by identifying conserved structural motifs from homologous experimental structures. Our method encodes spatial arrangements of up to five residues within 8.0 Å distance as sequence patterns, then aligns these patterns to query sequences to predict residue–residue contacts. Critically, our approach requires only a modest number of structural templates (typically 50–500) and runs on standard hardware without graphics processing units or high-performance computing clusters, processing proteins in 12–16 min regardless of length. We validated our method on 25 well-characterized protein domains, achieving correlations of 0.735–0.942 with experimental contact maps. Comparative analysis against MI and GREMLIN demonstrated that our method achieved better contact coverage while maintaining comparable accuracy. To demonstrate broader applicability, we tested on 7599 poorly annotated sequences using high-confidence AlphaFold structures as reference, achieving mean F 1-score of 0.609 ± 0.095 and accuracy of 0.954 ± 0.036. Our pattern matching approach provides a computationally efficient, interpretable alternative to both deep learning and coevolution-based methods, particularly valuable for proteins with limited sequence homologs or when rapid predictions are needed.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
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
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 5,990
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
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- Buslje, 2009, Correction for phylogeny, small number of observations and data redundancy improves the identification of coevolving amino acid pairs using mutual information, Bioinformatics, 25, 1125, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp135 · DOI
- Gouveia-Oliveira, 2007, Finding coevolving amino acid residues using row and column weighting of mutual information and multi-dimensional amino acid representation, Algorithms Mol. Biol., 2, 12, 10.1186/1748-7188-2-12 · DOI
- Dunn, 2008, Mutual information without the influence of phylogeny or entropy dramatically improves residue contact prediction, Bioinformatics, 24, 333, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm604 · DOI
- Kamisetty, 2013, Assessing the utility of coevolution-based residue–residue contact predictions in a sequence-and structure-rich era, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci., 110, 15674, 10.1073/pnas.1314045110 · DOI
- Hu, 2002, Mining protein contact maps, vol 2, 3, 10.5555/3012333.3012337 · DOI
- Ahmed, 2011, Incorporating protein sequence and evolutionary information in a structural pattern matching approach for contact maps, 49, 10.1159/000325880 · DOI
- Consortium, 2023, UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase in 2023, Nucleic Acids Res., 51, D523, 10.1093/nar/gkac1052 · DOI · Paper page
- Bairoch, 2000, The SWISS-PROT protein sequence database and its supplement TrEMBL in 2000, Nucleic Acids Res., 28, 45, 10.1093/nar/28.1.45 · DOI
- Blum, 2025, InterPro: the protein sequence classification resource in 2025<? mode longmeta?>, Nucleic Acids Res., 53, D444, 10.1093/nar/gkae1082 · DOI
- Johnson, 2010, Hidden Markov model speed heuristic and iterative HMM search procedure, BMC Bioinf., 11, 1, 10.1186/1471-2105-11-431 · DOI
- Sievers, 2011, Fast, scalable generation of high‐quality protein multiple sequence alignments using Clustal Omega, Mol. Syst. Biol., 7, 539, 10.1038/msb.2011.75 · DOI
- Shen, 2016, SeqKit: a cross-platform and ultrafast toolkit for FASTA/Q file manipulation, PLoS One, 11, 10.1371/journal.pone.0163962 · DOI · Paper page
- Katoh, 2013, MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improve-ments in performance and usability, Mol. Biol. Evol., 30, 772, 10.1093/molbev/mst010 · DOI · Paper page
- Hosoe, 2019, Structural and functional properties of Grb2 SH2 dimer in CD28 binding, Biophys. Physicobiol., 16, 80, 10.2142/biophysico.16.0_80 · DOI
- Tong, 1996, Crystal structures of the human p56lckSH2 domain in complex with two short phosphotyrosyl peptides at 1.0 Å and 1.8 Å resolution, J. Mol. Biol., 256, 601, 10.1006/jmbi.1996.0112 · DOI
- Hacisuleyman, 2025, Rapid and Interpretable Protein Contact Map Prediction Using a Pattern-Matching Strategy, Zenodo
Metadata
- Authors
- Hacisuleyman, A., & Fasshauer, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Lausanne (CH)
- Venue
- Physical Biology
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2026-02-20
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 026002
- ISSN
- 1478-3967 (ISSN-L)
- 1478-3975
- OpenAlex
- W7128505050
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- FWCI
- 2.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Physical Biology (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IRIS (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Swiss National Science Foundation (219549)
- 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
- protein contact map prediction, pattern matching, template-based modeling, conserved structural motifs, residue-residue contacts, structural homology, interpretable prediction, protein structure prediction, AlphaFold structures
- MeSH terms
- Amino Acid Sequence, Models, Molecular, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Sequence Alignment, Computational Biology
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