Cited by 84Protein Structure and DynamicsRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsEnzyme Structure and Function

Current structure predictors are not learning the physics of protein folding

Open access
Outeiral, Carlos, Nissley, Daniel A, Deane, Charlotte M·2022·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Summary: Motivation. Predicting the native state of a protein has long been considered a gateway problem for understanding protein folding. Recent advances in structural modeling driven by deep learning have achieved unprecedented success at predicting a protein’s crystal structure, but it is not clear if these models are learning the physics of how proteins dynamically fold into their equilibrium structure or are just accurate knowledge-based predictors of the final state. Results. In this work, we compare the pathways generated by state-of-the-art protein structure prediction methods to experimental data about protein folding pathways. The methods considered were AlphaFold 2, RoseTTAFold, trRosetta, RaptorX, DMPfold, EVfold, SAINT2 and Rosetta. We find evidence that their simulated dynamics capture some information about the folding pathway, but their predictive ability is worse than a trivial classifier using sequence-agnostic features like chain length. The folding trajectories produced are also uncorrelated with experimental observables such as intermediate structures and the folding rate constant. These results suggest that recent advances in structure prediction do not yet provide an enhanced understanding of protein folding. Availability. The data underlying this article are available in GitHub at https://github.com/oxpig/structure-vs-folding/ Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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/bioinformatics/btab881

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

  • AlphaFold accurately predicts protein folding but was found not to improve understanding of the underlying biochemical processes.

    “For example, AlphaFold accurately predicts protein folding but was found not to improve understanding of the underlying biochemical processes (Outeiral et al., 2022).”

    From Robust agents learn causal world models (2024) · cites this paper as Outeiral et al., 2022

    The Introduction and Discussion distinguish predicting a protein’s final structure from predicting how it folds: the paper describes structure predictors as successful at their primary role but says they do not enhance understanding of folding principles. Thus the claim is supported if “predicts protein folding” means predicting the final structure, but not if it means predicting the folding process or pathway. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Outeiral, C., Nissley, D. A., & Deane, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Deane, Charlotte M
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2022-01-31
Volume
38
Issue
7
Pages
1881-1887
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W4210460281
Cited by
82
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 17
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/M013243/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
Keywords
protein folding pathways, protein structure prediction, deep learning, AlphaFold2, RoseTTAFold, Rosetta, folding intermediates, folding rate constants, knowledge-based prediction
MeSH terms
Physics, 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.

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