PreprintCited by 42Protein Structure and DynamicsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Flexible Protein-Protein Docking with a Multi-Track Iterative Transformer

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1002/pro.4862 · Paper page

Abstract

Conventional protein-protein docking algorithms usually rely on heavy candidate sampling and re-ranking, but these steps are time-consuming and hinder applications that require high-throughput complex structure prediction, e.g., structure-based virtual screening. Existing deep learning methods for protein-protein docking, despite being much faster, suffer from low docking success rates. In addition, they simplify the problem to assume no conformational changes within any protein upon binding (rigid docking). This assumption precludes applications when binding-induced conformational changes play a role, such as allosteric inhibition or docking from uncertain unbound model structures. To address these limitations, we present GeoDock, a multi-track iterative transformer network to predict a docked structure from separate docking partners. Unlike deep learning models for protein structure prediction that input multiple sequence alignments (MSAs), GeoDock inputs just the sequences and structures of the docking partners, which suits the tasks when the individual structures are given. GeoDock is flexible at the protein residue level, allowing the prediction of conformational changes upon binding. For a benchmark set of rigid targets, GeoDock obtains a 41% success rate, outperforming all the other tested methods. For a more challenging benchmark set of flexible targets, GeoDock achieves a similar number of top-model successes as the traditional method ClusPro [1], but fewer than ReplicaDock2 [2]. GeoDock attains an average inference speed of under one second on a single GPU, enabling its application in large-scale structure screening. Although binding-induced conformational changes are still a challenge owing to limited training and evaluation data, our architecture sets up the foundation to capture this backbone flexibility. Code and a demonstration Jupyter notebook are available at https://github.com/Graylab/GeoDock .

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 · 10.1101/2023.06.29.547134

Cites

1 of 1 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: 66

  1. 10.1093/nar/gnh082 · DOI
  2. 2022, Induced fit with replica exchange improves protein complex structure prediction, PLOS Computational Biology, 18, e1010124, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010124 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1126/science.abj8754 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Ruidong Wu , Fan Ding , Rui Wang , Rui Shen , Xiwen Zhang , Shitong Luo , Chenpeng Su , Zuofan Wu , Qi Xie , Bonnie Berger , et al. High-resolution de novo structure prediction from primary sequence. BioRxiv, 2022.
  5. Zeming Lin , Halil Akin , Roshan Rao , Brian Hie , Zhongkai Zhu , Wenting Lu , Allan dos Santos Costa , Maryam Fazel-Zarandi , Tom Sercu , Sal Candido , et al. Language models of protein sequences at the scale of evolution enable accurate structure prediction. BioRxiv, 2022.
  6. 2022, Helixfold: An efficient implementation of alphafold2 using paddlepaddle, arXiv preprint
  7. 10.1093/NAR/GKAB1061 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1093/nar/gkh131 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.drudis.2014.02.005 · DOI
  10. 10.1006/jmbi.1997.1203 · DOI
  11. 1997, Evaluation of gramm low-resolution docking methodology on the hemagglutininantibody complex, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 29, 226, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0134(1997)1+<226::AID-PROT31>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
  12. 10.1093/protein/14.2.105 · DOI
  13. 2002, Docking unbound proteins using shape complementarity, desolvation, and electrostatics, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 47, 281, 10.1002/prot.10092 · DOI
  14. 2003, Zdock: an initial-stage protein-docking algorithm, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 52, 80, 10.1002/prot.10389 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1110/ps.26002 · DOI
  16. 2006, Piper: an fft-based protein docking program with pairwise potentials, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 65, 392, 10.1002/prot.21117 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1073/pnas.89.6.2195 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/0022-2836(82)90153-X · DOI
  19. Dina Duhovny , Ruth Nussinov , and Haim J Wolfson. Efficient unbound docking of rigid molecules . In International workshop on algorithms in bioinformatics, pages 185–200. Springer, 2002. · DOI
  20. 10.1093/nar/gki481 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1186/1471-2105-10-1 · DOI
  22. 2012, Multi-lzerd: multiple protein docking for asymmetric complexes, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 80, 1818, 10.1002/prot.24079 · DOI
  23. 2001, Protein docking using a genetic algorithm, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 44, 44, 10.1002/prot.1070 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/S0022-2836(03)00670-3 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.07.050 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.jmb.2008.05.042 · DOI
  27. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty355 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1110/ps.0239303 · DOI
  29. 2005, Attract: protein–protein docking in capri using a reduced protein model, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 60, 252, 10.1002/prot.20566 · DOI
  30. 2006, Accounting for loop flexibility during protein–protein docking, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 62, 956, 10.1002/prot.20770 · DOI
  31. 10.1021/ja026939x · DOI · Paper page
  32. 2007, HADDOCK versus HADDOCK: new features and performance of HADDOCK2. 0 on the capri targets, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 69, 726, 10.1002/prot.21723 · DOI
  33. 10.1002/jcc.540150503 · DOI
  34. 2003, Icm-disco docking by global energy optimization with fully flexible side-chains, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 52, 113, 10.1002/prot.10383 · DOI
  35. 2010, Swarmdock and the use of normal modes in protein-protein docking, International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 11, 3623, 10.3390/ijms11103623 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.sbi.2013.11.005 · DOI
  37. 2020, Deciphering interaction fingerprints from protein molecular surfaces using geometric deep learning, Nature Methods, 17, 184, 10.1038/s41592-019-0666-6 · DOI
  38. Jérôme Tubiana , Dina Schneidman-Duhovny , and Haim J Wolfson . Scannet: An interpretable geometric deep learning model for structure-based protein binding site prediction. Nature Methods, pages 1–10, 2022. · DOI · Paper page
  39. Alex Fout , Jonathon Byrd , Basir Shariat , and Asa Ben-Hur . Protein interface prediction using graph convolutional networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 2017.
  40. Raphael Townshend , Rishi Bedi , Patricia Suriana , and Ron Dror . End-to-end learning on 3d protein structure for interface prediction. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 2019.
  41. Yi Liu , Hao Yuan , Lei Cai , and Shuiwang Ji . Deep learning of high-order interactions for protein interface prediction. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery & data mining, pages 679–687, 2020. · DOI · Paper page
  42. 2022, Deep graph learning of inter-protein contacts, Bioinformatics, 38, 947, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btab761 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 2021, Protein interaction interface region prediction by geometric deep learning, Bioinformatics, 37, 2580, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btab154 · DOI
  44. 2021, Dncon2_inter: predicting interchain contacts for homodimeric and homomultimeric protein complexes using multiple sequence alignments of monomers and deep learning, Scientific Reports, 11, 1
  45. 2021, Accurate prediction of inter-protein residue–residue contacts for homo-oligomeric protein complexes, Briefings in Bioinformatics, 22, bbab038, 10.1093/bib/bbab038 · DOI
  46. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac063 · DOI · Paper page
  47. 2022, Drlcomplex: Reconstruction of protein quaternary structures using deep reinforcement learning, arXiv preprint
  48. Usman Ghani , Israel Desta , Akhil Jindal , Omeir Khan , George Jones , Nasser Hashemi , Sergey Kotelnikov , Dzmitry Padhorny , Sandor Vajda , and Dima Kozakov . Improved docking of protein models by a combination of alphafold2 and cluspro. BioRxiv, pages 2021–09, 2022. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Milot Mirdita , Konstantin Schütze , Yoshitaka Moriwaki , Lim Heo , Sergey Ovchinnikov , and Martin Steinegger . Colabfold: making protein folding accessible to all. Nature Methods, pages 1–4, 2022. · DOI · Paper page
  50. 2022, Af2complex predicts direct physical interactions in multimeric proteins with deep learning, Nature Communications, 13, 1
  51. Richard Evans , Michael O’Neill , Alexander Pritzel , Natasha Antropova , Andrew W Senior , Timothy Green , Augustin Žíde k, Russell Bates , Sam Blackwell , Jason Yim , et al. Protein complex prediction with AlphaFold-Multimer. BioRxiv, 2021. · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1002/pro.4379 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 2021, Independent se (3)-equivariant models for end-to-end rigid protein docking, arXiv preprint
  54. Freyr Sverrisson , Jean Feydy , Bruno E Correia , and Michael M Bronstein . Fast end-to-end learning on protein surfaces. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 15272–15281, 2021. · DOI
  55. Matthew McPartlon and Jinbo Xu . Deep learning for flexible and site-specific protein docking and design. BioRxiv, 2023. · DOI
  56. 10.1016/j.jmb.2015.07.016 · DOI · Paper page
  57. 2021, An expanded benchmark for antibody-antigen docking and affinity prediction reveals insights into antibody recognition determinants, Structure, 29, 606, 10.1016/j.str.2021.01.005 · DOI
  58. 10.1073/pnas.2016239118 · DOI · Paper page
  59. 10.1073/pnas.1914677117 · DOI · Paper page
  60. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt473 · DOI · Paper page
  61. 10.1371/journal.pone.0161879 · DOI · Paper page
  62. 2003, Capri: a critical assessment of predicted interactions, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 52, 2, 10.1002/prot.10381 · DOI · Paper page
  63. 10.1093/nar/gkx407 · DOI
  64. 10.1016/j.str.2020.06.006 · DOI
  65. 10.1016/j.str.2016.06.025 · DOI
  66. 2022, DiffDock: Diffusion steps, twists, and turns for molecular docking, arXiv preprint

Metadata

Authors
Chu, L.-S., Ruffolo, J. A., Harmalkar, A., & Gray, J. J.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Gray, Jeffrey J.
Venue
Protein Science
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2023-07-01
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
e4862-e4862
ISSN
0961-8368 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390245367
Cited by
42
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Protein Science (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM008403, R35GM141881, T32GM135131)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
protein-protein docking, flexible docking, structure-based virtual screening, immune complexes

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