Assessing scoring metrics for AlphaFold2 and AlphaFold3 protein complex predictions
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1002/pro.70327 · Paper page
Abstract
1. Recent breakthroughs in AI-driven protein structure prediction have revolutionized structural biology, unlocking new possibilities to model complex biomolecular interactions. We evaluated widely-used scoring metrics for assessing models predicted by ColabFold with templates, ColabFold without templates, and AlphaFold3. We benchmarked the optimal cutoffs for these assessment scores using a set of 223 heterodimeric, high-resolution protein structures and their predictions. Our results show that ColabFold with templates and AlphaFold3 perform similarly and both outperform ColabFold without templates. However, the assessment scores perform best on ColabFold without templates. Furthermore, interface-specific scores are more reliable for evaluating protein complex predictions compared to the corresponding global scores. Notably, ipTM and model confidence achieve the best discrimination between correct and incorrect predictions. Based on our results, we developed a weighted combined score, C2Qscore, to improve model quality assessment. We used C2Qscore to analyse dimers from large assemblies solved by cryoEM, revealing potential limitations of the existing metrics when multiple configurations of heterodimers are possible. This study provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses of current scores and offers guidance for improving protein complex model assessment under realistic use case conditions. C2Qscore has been integrated as a tool into our ChimeraX plug-in PICKLUSTER v.2.0 and is also available as a command-line tool on https://gitlab.com/topf-lab/c2qscore . Impact of this work: Many essential cellular functions rely on protein complexes, which are now predominantly predicted using AlphaFold by both experts and non-experts. This study systematically evaluates the performance of multiple widely used scoring metrics for distinguishing accurate from poor predictions. The new C2Qscore developed in this study improves the reliability of AlphaFold model assessments, enabling a more consistent and accessible evaluation of protein structures. These advancements support downstream applications in biomedicine, drug discovery, and computational protein design.
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
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.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3
Abramson, J., Adler, J., Dunger, J., Evans, R., Green, T., Pritzel, A., Ronneberger, O., Willmore, L., Ballard, A. J., Bambrick, J., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07487-w · Cited by 15,861 · see citing works
Improved prediction of protein-protein interactions using AlphaFold2
Bryant, P., Pozzati, G., & Elofsson, A. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.09.15.460468 · Cited by 1,025 · see citing works
Benchmarking AlphaFold for protein complex modeling reveals accuracy determinants
Yin, R., Feng, B. Y., Varshney, A., & Pierce, B. G. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.10.23.465575 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
From interaction networks to interfaces, scanning intrinsically disordered regions using AlphaFold2
Bret, H., Gao, J., Zea, D. J., Andreani, J., & Guerois, R. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-44288-7 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Genz, L. R., Nair, S., Nagar, N., & Topf, M.
- Affiliations
- Leibniz Institute of Virology (LIV) (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Topf, Maya
- Venue
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2025-04-17
- OpenAlex
- W4409728353
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Desy Publications Database (Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- HamburgX
- Leibniz Institut für Virologie
- Leibniz ScienceCampus InterACt
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (CRC1648)
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (031L028)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Keywords
- protein complex structure prediction, scoring metrics, AlphaFold3, ColabFold, model confidence, cryo-EM structure, model quality assessment
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