The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
AlphaFold at CASP13
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Computational prediction of protein structure from sequence is broadly viewed as a foundational problem of biochemistry and one of the most difficult challenges in bioinformatics. Once every two years the Critical Assessment of protein Structure Prediction (CASP) experiments are held to assess the state of the art in the field in a blind fashion, by presenting predictor groups with protein sequences whose structures have been solved but have not yet been made publicly available. The first CASP was organized in 1994, and the latest, CASP13, took place last December, when for the first time the industrial laboratory DeepMind entered the competition. DeepMind's entry, AlphaFold, placed first in the Free Modeling (FM) category, which assesses methods on their ability to predict novel protein folds (the Zhang group placed first in the Template-Based Modeling (TBM) category, which assess methods on predicting proteins whose folds are related to ones already in the Protein Data Bank.) DeepMind's success generated significant public interest. Their approach builds on two ideas developed in the academic community during the preceding decade: (i) the use of co-evolutionary analysis to map residue co-variation in protein sequence to physical contact in protein structure, and (ii) the application of deep neural networks to robustly identify patterns in protein sequence and co-evolutionary couplings and convert them into contact maps. In this Letter, we contextualize the significance of DeepMind's entry within the broader history of CASP, relate AlphaFold's methodological advances to prior work, and speculate on the future of this important problem.
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
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14539 · Cited by 84,126
The I-TASSER Suite: protein structure and function prediction
Yang, J., Yan, R., Roy, A., Xu, D., Poisson, J., & Zhang, Y. (2015) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3213 · Cited by 5,596
Leaver-Fay (2011) · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-381270-4.00019-6 · Cited by 1,904
Protein 3D Structure Computed from Evolutionary Sequence Variation
Marks, D. S., Colwell, L. J., Sheridan, R., Hopf, T. A., Pagnani, A., Zecchina, R., & Sander, C. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028766 · Cited by 1,144
Unified rational protein engineering with sequence-based deep representation learning
Alley, E. C., Khimulya, G., Biswas, S., AlQuraishi, M., & Church, G. M. (2019) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0598-1 · Cited by 1,131
Self-citationAccurate De Novo Prediction of Protein Contact Map by Ultra-Deep Learning Model
Wang, S., Sun, S., Li, Z., Zhang, R., & Xu, J. (2017) · PLOS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005324 · Cited by 931
End-to-End Differentiable Learning of Protein Structure
AlQuraishi, M. (2019) · Cell Systems · doi:10.1016/j.cels.2019.03.006 · Cited by 371
Self-citationAssessment of contact predictions in CASP12: Co‐evolution and deep learning coming of age
Schaarschmidt, J., Monastyrskyy, B., Kryshtafovych, A., & Bonvin, A. M. J. J. (2018) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.25407 · Cited by 177
Correlated mutations in models of protein sequences: phylogenetic and structural effects
Lapedes, A. S., Giraud, B., Liu, L., & Stormo, G. D. (1999) · Institute of Mathematical Statistics Lecture Notes - Monograph Series · doi:10.1214/lnms/1215455556 · Cited by 124
Cited by
Artificial intelligence: A powerful paradigm for scientific research
Xu, Y., Liu, X., Cao, X., Huang, C., Liu, E., Qian, S., Liu, X., Wu, Y., Dong, F., Qiu, C.-W., et al. (2021) · The Innovation · doi:10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100179 · Cited by 1,726
Chklovski, A., Parks, D. H., Woodcroft, B. J., & Tyson, G. W. (2023) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-023-01940-w · Cited by 1,705
Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research
Messeri, L., & Crockett, M. J. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07146-0 · Cited by 707
Vatansever, S., Schlessinger, A., Wacker, D., Kaniskan, H. Ü., Jin, J., Zhou, M., & Zhang, B. (2021) · Medicinal Research Reviews · doi:10.1002/med.21764 · Cited by 429
mRNA Vaccine Era—Mechanisms, Drug Platform and Clinical Prospection
Xu, S., Yang, K., Li, R., & Zhang, L. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21186582 · Cited by 368
Deep Learning in Protein Structural Modeling and Design
Gao, W., Mahajan, S. P., Sulam, J., & Gray, J. J. (2020) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2020.100142 · Cited by 227
LIRA: Learnable, Imperceptible and Robust Backdoor Attacks
Doan, K., Lao, Y., Zhao, W., & Li, P. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv48922.2021.01175 · Cited by 211
Chen, J., Hu, Z., Sun, S., Tan, Q., Wang, Y., Yu, Q., Zong, L., Hong, L., Xiao, J., Shen, T., et al. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.08.06.503062 · Cited by 247
AlphaFold, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and Allostery
Nussinov, R., Zhang, M., Liu, Y., & Jang, H. (2022) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.2c04346 · Cited by 190
Understanding a protein fold: The physics, chemistry, and biology of α-helical coiled coils
Woolfson, D. N. (2023) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104579 · Cited by 106
Abriata, L. A., Tamò, G. E., & Dal Peraro, M. (2019) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.25787 · Cited by 79
Protein structure prediction by AlphaFold 2: are attention and symmetries all you need?
Bouatta, N., Sorger, P., & AlQuraishi, M. (2021) · Acta Crystallographica Section D Structural Biology · doi:10.1107/s2059798321007531 · Cited by 69
Self-citationMachine learning meets quantum foundations: A brief survey
Bharti, K., Haug, T., Vedral, V., & Kwek, L.-C. (2020) · AVS Quantum Science · doi:10.1116/5.0007529 · Cited by 59
DeepUMQA: Ultrafast Shape Recognition-based Protein Model Quality Assessment using Deep Learning
Guo, S.-S., Liu, J., Zhou, X.-G., & Zhang, G.-J. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.10.02.462491 · Cited by 53
DeepUMQA: ultrafast shape recognition-based protein model quality assessment using deep learning
Guo, S.-S., Liu, J., Zhou, X.-G., & Zhang, G.-J. (2022) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btac056 · Cited by 53
Barbarin-Bocahu, I., & Graille, M. (2022) · Acta Crystallographica Section D Structural Biology · doi:10.1107/s2059798322002157 · Cited by 52
High Molecular Weight Kininogen: A Review of the Structural Literature
Ponczek, M. B. (2021) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms222413370 · Cited by 45
Inhibiting a promiscuous GPCR: iterative discovery of bitter taste receptor ligands
Fierro, F., Peri, L., Hübner, H., Tabor-Schkade, A., Waterloo, L., Löber, S., Pfeiffer, T., Weikert, D., Dingjan, T., Margulis, E., et al. (2023) · Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s00018-023-04765-0 · Cited by 36
FRAGSITE: A Fragment-Based Approach for Virtual Ligand Screening
Zhou, H., Cao, H., & Skolnick, J. (2021) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01160 · Cited by 32
Hou, T., Bian, Y., McGuire, T., & Xie, X.-Q. (2021) · Biomolecules · doi:10.3390/biom11060870 · Cited by 30
Structural Bioinformatics and Deep Learning of Metalloproteins: Recent Advances and Applications
Andreini, C., & Rosato, A. (2022) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms23147684 · Cited by 25
Ohdate, K., Sakata, M., Maeda, K., Sakamaki, Y., Nimura-Matsune, K., Ohbayashi, R., Hess, W. R., & Watanabe, S. (2024) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2024.1311290 · Cited by 9
Nanobodies as tools for studying human frataxin biology
Pignataro, M. F., Fernández, N. B., Garay-Alvarez, A., Pavan, M. F., Molina, R., Muñoz, I. G., Grossi, J., Noguera, M., Vila, A., García, A. E., et al. (2026) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-025-09458-x · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- AlQuraishi, M.
- Venue
- Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-05-22
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 4862-4865
- ISSN
- 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
- 1367-4811
- OpenAlex
- W2944959599
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 12.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
