Cited by 6Protein Structure and DynamicsEnzyme Structure and FunctionMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estimating protein complex model accuracy using graph transformers and pairwise similarity graphs

Open access
Liu, Jian, Neupane, Pawan, Cheng, Jianlin·2024·Bioinformatics Advances

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Motivation: Estimation of protein complex structure accuracy is essential for effective structural model selection in structural biology applications such as protein function analysis and drug design. Despite the success of structure prediction methods such as AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold3, selecting top-quality structural models from large model pools remains challenging. Results: We present GATE, a novel method that uses graph transformers on pairwise model similarity graphs to predict the quality (accuracy) of complex structural models. By integrating single-model and multimodel quality features, GATE captures intrinsic model characteristics and intermodel geometric similarities to make robust predictions. On the dataset of the 15th Critical Assessment of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP15), GATE achieved the highest Pearson’s correlation (0.748) and the lowest ranking loss (0.1191) compared with existing methods. In the blind CASP16 experiment, GATE ranked fifth based on the sum of z-scores, with a Pearson’s correlation of 0.7076 (first), a Spearman’s correlation of 0.4514 (fourth), a ranking loss of 0.1221 (third), and an area under the curve score of 0.6680 (third) on per-target TM-score-based metrics. Additionally, GATE also performed consistently on large in-house datasets generated by extensive AlphaFold-based sampling with MULTICOM4, confirming its robustness and practical applicability in real-world model selection scenarios. Availability and implementation: GATE is available at https://github.com/BioinfoMachineLearning/GATE.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioadv/vbaf180

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Cao, 2017, Qacon: single model quality assessment using protein structural and contact information with machine learning techniques, Bioinformatics, 33, 586, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btw694 · DOI
  2. Cao, 2015, Large-scale model quality assessment for improving protein tertiary structure prediction, Bioinformatics, 31, i116, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv235 · DOI
  3. Chen, 2023, 3d-equivariant graph neural networks for protein model quality assessment, Bioinformatics, 39, btad030, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btad030 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Chen, 2022, Distema: distance map-based estimation of single protein model accuracy with attentive 2d convolutional neural network, BMC Bioinformatics, 23, 141, 10.1186/s12859-022-04683-1 · DOI
  5. Chen, 2023, A gated graph transformer for protein complex structure quality assessment and its performance in casp15, Bioinformatics, 39, i308, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btad203 · DOI
  6. Cheng, 2019, Estimation of model accuracy in casp13, Proteins, 87, 1361, 10.1002/prot.25767 · DOI
  7. Edmunds, 2023, Estimation of model accuracy in casp15 using the m odfolddock server, Proteins, 91, 1871, 10.1002/prot.26532 · DOI
  8. Edmunds, 2024, Benchmarking of alphafold2 accuracy self-estimates as indicators of empirical model quality and ranking: a comparison with independent model quality assessment programmes, Bioinformatics, 40, btae491, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btae491 · DOI
  9. Evans, 2021, Protein complex prediction with alphafold-multimer, bioRxiv, 10.1101/2021.10.04.463034 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Liu, 2025, Deepumqa-x: comprehensive and insightful estimation of model accuracy for protein single-chain and complex, Nucl Acids Res, 53, W219, 10.1093/nar/gkaf380 · DOI
  11. Liu, 2023, Improving alphafold2-based protein tertiary structure prediction with multicom in casp15, Commun Chem, 6, 188, 10.1038/s42004-023-00991-6 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Liu, 2023, Enhancing alphafold-multimer-based protein complex structure prediction with multicom in casp15, Commun Biol, 6, 1140, 10.1038/s42003-023-05525-3 · DOI · Paper page
  13. McGuffin, 2008, The modfold server for the quality assessment of protein structural models, Bioinformatics, 24, 586, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn014 · DOI
  14. McGuffin, 2025, Prediction and quality assessment of protein quaternary structure models using the multifold2 and modfolddock2 servers, Nucleic Acids Res, 53, W472, 10.1093/nar/gkaf336 · DOI
  15. Mirabello, 2024, Unmasking alphafold to integrate experiments and predictions in multimeric complexes, Nat Commun, 15, 8724, 10.1038/s41467-024-52951-w · DOI
  16. Morehead, 2024, Protein structure accuracy estimation using geometry-complete perceptron networks, Protein Sci, 33, e4932, 10.1002/pro.4932 · DOI
  17. Olechnovič, 2013, Cad-score: a new contact area difference-based function for evaluation of protein structural models, Proteins, 81, 149, 10.1002/prot.24172 · DOI
  18. Olechnovič, 2023, Voroif-gnn: voronoi tessellation-derived protein–protein interface assessment using a graph neural network, Proteins, 91, 1879, 10.1002/prot.26554 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Roy, 2023, Combining pairwise structural similarity and deep learning interface contact prediction to estimate protein complex model accuracy in casp15, Proteins, 91, 1889, 10.1002/prot.26542 · DOI
  20. Shuvo, 2020, Qdeep: distance-based protein model quality estimation by residue-level ensemble error classifications using stacked deep residual neural networks, Bioinformatics, 36, i285, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa455 · DOI
  21. Studer, 2023, Assessment of the assessment—all about complexes, Proteins, 91, 1850, 10.1002/prot.26612 · DOI
  22. Wallner, 2003, Can correct protein models be identified?, Protein Sci, 12, 1073, 10.1110/ps.0236803 · DOI
  23. Wang, 2009, Evaluating the absolute quality of a single protein model using structural features and support vector machines, Proteins, 75, 638, 10.1002/prot.22275 · DOI
  24. Wu, 2020, A novel score for highly accurate and efficient prediction of native protein structures, bioRxiv, 10.1101/2020.04.23.056945 · DOI
  25. Zhang, 2022, Us-align: universal structure alignments of proteins, nucleic acids, and macromolecular complexes, Nat Methods, 19, 1109, 10.1038/s41592-022-01585-1 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Liu, J., Neupane, P., & Cheng, J.
Affiliations
University of Missouri (US)
Corresponding author
Cheng, Jianlin
Venue
Bioinformatics Advances
Published
2024-12-26
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
vbaf180-vbaf180
ISSN
2635-0041 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4412712728
Cited by
6
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DBI2308699)
  • National Institutes of Health (R01GM093123)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Structural Biology › Enzyme Structure and Function
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
protein complex structure, model selection, graph transformer, CASP15, CASP16, AlphaFold, TM-score, ranking loss

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