PreprintCited by 1RNA and protein synthesis mechanismsProtein Structure and DynamicsGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

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

Influence of Contact Map Topology on RNA Structure Prediction

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1093/nar/gkaf1370 · Paper page

Abstract

The available sequence data of RNA molecules have highly increased in the past years. Unfortunately, while computational power is still under exponential growth, the computer prediction quality from sequence to final structure is still inferior to the labour intensive experimental work. Although a reliable end-to-end procedure was already developed for proteins since Alphafold2, while its successor AlphaFold3 can also predict RNA, its confidence in particular for novel sequences and folds appear still limited. Another strategy entails two steps: (i) predicting potential contacts in the form of a contact maps from evolutionary data, and (ii) simulating the molecule with a physical force field while using the contact map as restraint. However, the quality of the structure prediction crucially depends on the quality of the contact map. Until now, only the proportion of true positive contacts was considered as a quality characteristic. We propose to also include the distribution of these contacts, and have done so in our recent studies. We observed that the clustering of contacts, as is common for many AI algorithms, has a negative impact on prediction quality. In contrast, a more distributed topology is beneficial. We have applied these findings from computer experiments to current algorithms and introduced a measure of distribution, the Gaussian score.

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 · 10.1101/2024.11.25.625138

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: 35

  1. 10.1038/227561a0 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.3109/10409238509082541 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/S0079-6603(08)60081-1 · DOI
  4. 10.1093/hmg/ddl046 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/S0959-440X(98)80059-6 · DOI
  6. 10.1038/nrmicro2507 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1038/nrmicro3003 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.chembiol.2003.09.002 · DOI
  9. 2021, SARS-CoV-2 RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) targeting: An in silico perspective, Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, 39, 3204
  10. 10.1016/j.mib.2007.05.001 · DOI
  11. 10.1093/nar/gkad726 · DOI
  12. 10.1063/1.1730376 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1021/ar900093g · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.bpj.2017.05.043 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1016/j.bpj.2008.10.033 · DOI
  16. 10.1093/nar/gkt1213 · DOI
  17. 10.21105/joss.03325 · DOI
  18. Arthur Voronin and Alexander Schug . Native-contact guided replica exchange simulations of structured rna. In NIC Symposium proceedings, pages 65–74, 2022.
  19. 10.1093/nar/gkz1108 · DOI
  20. 10.1093/nar/gkv1479 · DOI
  21. Clarence Yu Cheng , Fang-Chieh Chou , and Rhiju Das . Chapter Two - Modeling Complex RNA Tertiary Folds with Rosetta. In Shi-Jie Chen and Donald H. Burke-Aguero , editors, Methods in Enzymology, volume 553 of Computational Methods for Understanding Riboswitches, pages 35–64. Academic Press, January 2015. · DOI
  22. Eleonora De Leonardis , Benjamin Lutz , Sebastian Ratz , Simona Cocco , Rémi Monasson , Alexander Schug , and Martin Weigt . Direct-Coupling Analysis of nucleotide coevolution facilitates RNA secondary and tertiary structure prediction. Nucleic Acids Research, page gkv932, September 2015. · DOI
  23. 2019, Shedding light on the dark matter of the biomolecular structural universe: Progress in rna 3d structure prediction, Methods, 162, 68
  24. 10.1073/pnas.0805923106 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1073/pnas.1111471108 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Oskar Taubert , Fabrice von der Lehr , Alina Bazarova , Christian Faber , Philipp Knechtges , Marie Weiel , Charlotte Debus , Daniel Coquelin , Achim Basermann , Achim Streit , Stefan Kesselheim , Markus Götz , and Alexander Schug . RNA contact prediction by data efficient deep learning. 6(1):1– 8. · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1093/nar/gkab1144 · DOI
  28. Josh Abramson , Jonas Adler , Jack Dunger , Richard Evans , Tim Green , Alexander Pritzel , Olaf Ronneberger , Lindsay Willmore , Andrew J. Ballard , Joshua Bambrick , Sebastian W. Bodenstein , David A. Evans , Chia-Chun Hung , Michael O’Neill , David Reiman , Kathryn Tunyasuvunakool , Zachary Wu , Akvilė Žemgulytė , Eirini Arvaniti , Charles Beattie , Ottavia Bertolli , Alex Bridgland , Alexey Cherepanov , Miles Congreve , Alexander I. Cowen-Rivers , Andrew Cowie , Michael Figurnov , Fabian B. Fuchs , Hannah Gladman , Rishub Jain , Yousuf A. Khan , Caroline M. R. Low , Kuba Perlin , Anna Potapenko , Pascal Savy , Sukhdeep Singh , Adrian Stecula , Ashok Thillaisundaram , Catherine Tong , Sergei Yakneen , Ellen D. Zhong , Michal Zielinski , Augustin Žídek , Victor Bapst , Pushmeet Kohli , Max Jaderberg , Demis Hassabis , and John M. Jumper . Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3. Nature, pages 1–3, May 2024.
  29. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz892 · DOI
  30. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty862 · DOI
  31. 10.1261/rna.073809.119 · DOI
  32. 1993, The CNN paradigm, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Fundamental Theory and Applications, 40, 147, 10.1109/81.222795 · DOI
  33. 10.1093/nar/28.1.235 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btae074 · DOI
  35. Jülich Supercomputing Centre, 2021, JUWELS cluster and booster: Exascale pathfinder with modular supercomputing architecture at Juelich Supercomputing Centre, Journal of Large-scale Research Facilities, 7, A138

Metadata

Authors
Faber, C., Upadhyay, U., Taubert, O., & Schug, A.
Affiliations
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
Corresponding author
Schug, Alexander
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2024-11-25
Volume
53
Issue
22
ISSN
0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4417457892
Cited by
1
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
0.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nucleic Acids Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
Funders
Forschungszentrum Jülich
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
RNA structure prediction, RNA folding, AlphaFold3
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Models, Molecular, Nucleic Acid Conformation, RNA

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