GraphGPSM: a global scoring model for protein structure using graph neural networks
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
The scoring models used for protein structure modeling and ranking are mainly divided into unified field and protein-specific scoring functions. Although protein structure prediction has made tremendous progress since CASP14, the modeling accuracy still cannot meet the requirements to a certain extent. Especially, accurate modeling of multi-domain and orphan proteins remains a challenge. Therefore, an accurate and efficient protein scoring model should be developed urgently to guide the protein structure folding or ranking through deep learning. In this work, we propose a protein structure global scoring model based on equivariant graph neural network (EGNN), named GraphGPSM, to guide protein structure modeling and ranking. We construct an EGNN architecture, and a message passing mechanism is designed to update and transmit information between nodes and edges of the graph. Finally, the global score of the protein model is output through a multilayer perceptron. Residue-level ultrafast shape recognition is used to describe the relationship between residues and the overall structure topology, and distance and direction encoded by Gaussian radial basis functions are designed to represent the overall topology of the protein backbone. These two features are combined with Rosetta energy terms, backbone dihedral angles and inter-residue distance and orientations to represent the protein model and embedded into the nodes and edges of the graph neural network. The experimental results on the CASP13, CASP14 and CAMEO test sets show that the scores of our developed GraphGPSM have a strong correlation with the TM-score of the models, which are significantly better than those of the unified field score function REF2015 and the state-of-the-art local lDDT-based scoring models ModFOLD8, ProQ3D and DeepAccNet, etc. The modeling experimental results on 484 test proteins demonstrate that GraphGPSM can greatly improve the modeling accuracy. GraphGPSM is further used to model 35 orphan proteins and 57 multi-domain proteins. The results show that the average TM-score of the models predicted by GraphGPSM is 13.2 and 7.1% higher than that of the models predicted by AlphaFold2. GraphGPSM also participates in CASP15 and achieves competitive performance in global accuracy estimation.
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
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
Comparative protein structure modeling using MODELLER
Webb, B., & Sali, A. (2016) · Current Protocols in Protein Science · doi:10.1002/cpps.20 · Cited by 730 · see citing works
Single-sequence protein structure prediction using language models from deep learning
Chowdhury, R., Bouatta, N., Biswas, S., Rochereau, C., Church, G. M., Sorger, P. K., & AlQuraishi, M. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.08.02.454840 · Cited by 455 · see citing works
Single-sequence protein structure prediction using a language model and deep learning
Chowdhury, R., Bouatta, N., Biswas, S., Floristean, C., Kharkar, A., Roy, K., Rochereau, C., Ahdritz, G., Zhang, J., Church, G. M., et al. (2022) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-022-01432-w · Cited by 455 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- He, G., Liu, J., Liu, D., & Zhang, G.
- Affiliations
- College of Information Engineering, Zhejiang University of Technology
- Zhejiang University of Technology (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Zhang, Guijun
- Venue
- Briefings in Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2023-06-14
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- ISSN
- 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-4054
- OpenAlex
- W4380625376
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 1.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- dx.doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Briefings in Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Key Project of Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (LZ20F030002)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (62173304)
- Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (2022ZD0115100)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Keywords
- protein structure prediction, equivariant graph neural networks, multidomain proteins, orphan proteins, Gaussian radial basis functions, TM-score, CASP15
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Neural Networks, Computer, Databases, Protein
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