Cited by 6Protein Structure and DynamicsMachine Learning in BioinformaticsEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Designing diverse and high-performance proteins with a large language model in the loop

Open access
Gomez-Uribe, Carlos A., Gado, Japheth, Islamov, Meiirbek·2025·PLOS Computational Biology

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

We present a protein engineering approach to directed evolution with machine learning that integrates a new semi-supervised neural network fitness prediction model, Seq2Fitness, and an innovative optimization algorithm, b iphasic a nnealing for d iverse and a daptive s equence s ampling (BADASS) to design sequences. Seq2Fitness leverages protein language models to predict fitness landscapes, combining evolutionary data with experimental labels, while BADASS efficiently explores these landscapes by dynamically adjusting temperature and mutation energies to prevent premature convergence and to generate diverse high-fitness sequences. Compared to alternative models, Seq2Fitness improves Spearman correlation with experimental fitness measurements, increasing from 0.34 to 0.55 on sequences containing mutations at positions entirely not seen during training. BADASS requires less memory and computation compared to gradient-based Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods, while generating more high-fitness and diverse sequences across two protein families. For both families, 100% of the top 10,000 sequences identified by BADASS exceed the wildtype in predicted fitness, whereas competing methods range from 3% to 99%, often producing far fewer than 10,000 sequences. BADASS also finds higher-fitness sequences at every cutoff (top 1, 100, and 10,000). Additionally, we provide a theoretical framework explaining BADASS’s underlying mechanism and behavior. While we focus on amino acid sequences, BADASS may generalize to other sequence spaces, such as DNA and RNA.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013119

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig 1 Overview of our approach. (A) Pipeline for directed evolution with machine learning using our proposed fitness prediction model and optimizer. New designs can start by running BADASS to select sequences with multiple mutations and high zero-shot scores from evolutionary models like ESM2 for an initial screening. (B) Architecture of the semi-supervised Seq2Fitness model. (C) The optimizer approach demonstrating the initial transient phase and two cooling and heating cycles. Sequences are iteratively sampled from an updated probability distribution, with the sampling temperature reduced (cooled) as the average fitness score rises. After the set point μhigh is breached, cooling continues for patience number of iterations, after which the temperature is increased (heated). The fitness score decreases until it reaches the set point μlow, at which point cooling resumes. The optimization process consists of multiple cooling and heating phases.
Fig 1 Overview of our approach. (A) Pipeline for directed evolution with machine learning using our proposed fitness prediction model and optimizer. New designs can start by running BADASS to select sequences with multiple mutations and high zero-shot scores from evolutionary models like ESM2 for an initial screening. (B) Architecture of the semi-supervised Seq2Fitness model. (C) The optimizer approach demonstrating the initial transient phase and two cooling and heating cycles. Sequences are iteratively sampled from an updated probability distribution, with the sampling temperature reduced (cooled) as the average fitness score rises. After the set point μhigh is breached, cooling continues for patience number of iterations, after which the temperature is increased (heated). The fitness score decreases until it reaches the set point μlow, at which point cooling resumes. The optimization process consists of multiple cooling and heating phases.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 2 Fitness score statistics for BADASS optimization of alpha-amylase (AMY_BACSU). BADASS was run for 140 iterations with a batch size of 1,000. The plot shows fitness score averaged over sampled sequences per iteration, with the shaded area representing scores within 1.96σ of the average, with σ the standard deviation of batch scores. Horizontal lines denote the set points μlow and μhigh that govern the transitions between cooling and heating phases (Fig 1C). Vertical lines mark iterations where phase transitions occur as a moving average of fitness scores crosses the thresholds. The optimization was performed using the unsupervised ESM2 model and the semi-supervised Seq2Fitness model. Fitness scores were standardized as described in the methods. Runs included either exactly 6 mutations per variant (A, C) or an even mix of 2 to 6 mutations (B, D).
Fig 2 Fitness score statistics for BADASS optimization of alpha-amylase (AMY_BACSU). BADASS was run for 140 iterations with a batch size of 1,000. The plot shows fitness score averaged over sampled sequences per iteration, with the shaded area representing scores within 1.96σ of the average, with σ the standard deviation of batch scores. Horizontal lines denote the set points μlow and μhigh that govern the transitions between cooling and heating phases (Fig 1C). Vertical lines mark iterations where phase transitions occur as a moving average of fitness scores crosses the thresholds. The optimization was performed using the unsupervised ESM2 model and the semi-supervised Seq2Fitness model. Fitness scores were standardized as described in the methods. Runs included either exactly 6 mutations per variant (A, C) or an even mix of 2 to 6 mutations (B, D).CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 3 Order parameters versus temperature for amylase tasks: mean score and variance of scores versus temperature after initial transient, i.e., at steady-state oscillatory BADASS behavior. Markers come from BADASS runs, and lines are fits using Eqs 5–7 in S1 Text. These were obtained from cooling then heating runs of our algorithm for the amylase task: on the left using the ESM2 mutant marginal score, and on the right using the machine learning model that predicts fitness for stain removal and dp3 function. We ran the algorithm for 250 iterations, scoring 500 sequences in each iteration, and show all data for iterations larger than 100 to avoid the initial transient. The peak of the variance at intermediate temperatures is striking. Running the algorithm with an even blend of numbers of mutations changes the variance behavior, and was not fit to our equations. The mean and variance traces here are reminiscent of the magnetization and susceptibility in Ising models.
Fig 3 Order parameters versus temperature for amylase tasks: mean score and variance of scores versus temperature after initial transient, i.e., at steady-state oscillatory BADASS behavior. Markers come from BADASS runs, and lines are fits using Eqs 5–7 in S1 Text. These were obtained from cooling then heating runs of our algorithm for the amylase task: on the left using the ESM2 mutant marginal score, and on the right using the machine learning model that predicts fitness for stain removal and dp3 function. We ran the algorithm for 250 iterations, scoring 500 sequences in each iteration, and show all data for iterations larger than 100 to avoid the initial transient. The peak of the variance at intermediate temperatures is striking. Running the algorithm with an even blend of numbers of mutations changes the variance behavior, and was not fit to our equations. The mean and variance traces here are reminiscent of the magnetization and susceptibility in Ising models.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 4 Order parameters versus temperature for the NucB tasks: analogous to Fig 3. Left corresponds to ESM2 mutant marginal scores, and right the Seq2Fitness model score: the logit for the probability that the nuclease activity is higher than that of the reference sequence.
Fig 4 Order parameters versus temperature for the NucB tasks: analogous to Fig 3. Left corresponds to ESM2 mutant marginal scores, and right the Seq2Fitness model score: the logit for the probability that the nuclease activity is higher than that of the reference sequence.CC BY · PubMed Central

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

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. KK Yang, 2019, Machine-learning-guided directed evolution for protein engineering, Nat Methods, 16, 687, 10.1038/s41592-019-0496-6 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Bachas S, Rakocevic G, Spencer D, Sastry AV, Haile R, Sutton JM. Antibody optimization enabled by artificial intelligence predictions of binding affinity and naturalness. 2022. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.08.16.504181v1 · DOI
  3. N Thomas, 2024, Engineering of highly active and diverse nuclease enzymes by combining machine learning and ultra-high-throughput screening, 10.1101/2024.03.21.585615 · DOI
  4. DH Bryant, 2021, Deep diversification of an AAV capsid protein by machine learning, Nat Biotechnol, 39, 691, 10.1038/s41587-020-00793-4 · DOI
  5. Z Wu, 2019, Machine learning-assisted directed protein evolution with combinatorial libraries, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 116, 8852, 10.1073/pnas.1901979116 · DOI
  6. BL Hie, 2022, Adaptive machine learning for protein engineering, Curr Opin Struct Biol, 72, 145, 10.1016/j.sbi.2021.11.002 · DOI
  7. J Meier, 2021, Language models enable zero-shot prediction of the effects of mutations on protein function. In:, 29287
  8. P Notin, 2022, Tranception: protein fitness prediction with autoregressive transformers and inference-time retrieval., 16990
  9. S Gelman, 2021, Neural networks to learn protein sequence-function relationships from deep mutational scanning data, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 118, 10.1073/pnas.2104878118 · DOI
  10. C Hsu, 2022, Learning protein fitness models from evolutionary and assay-labeled data, Nat Biotechnol, 40, 1114, 10.1038/s41587-021-01146-5 · DOI
  11. A Shaw, 2023, Removing bias in sequence models of protein fitness, 10.1101/2023.09.28.560044 · DOI
  12. DH Brookes, 2022, On the sparsity of fitness functions and implications for learning, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 119, 10.1073/pnas.2109649118 · DOI
  13. Sandhu M, Chen J, Matthews D, Spence MA, Pulsford SB, Gall B. Computational and experimental exploration of protein fitness landscapes: navigating smooth and rugged terrains. arXiv preprint 2024. doi: arXiv:241112957 · DOI
  14. N Gruver, 2024, Protein design with guided discrete diffusion, Adv Neural Inf Process Syst, 36
  15. Frey NC, Berenberg D, Zadorozhny K, Kleinhenz J, Lafrance-Vanasse J, Hotzel I. Protein discovery with discrete walk-jump sampling. arXiv preprint 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.12360 · arXiv
  16. P Emami, 2023, Plug & play directed evolution of proteins with gradient-based discrete MCMC, Mach Learn: Sci Technol, 4, 025014
  17. Kirjner A, Yim J, Samusevich R, Bracha S, Jaakkola TS, Barzilay R, et al. Improving protein optimization with smoothed fitness landscapes. In: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations; 2023.Available from: https://openreview.net/forum?id=rxlF2Zv8x0
  18. CR Freschlin, 2024, Neural network extrapolation to distant regions of the protein fitness landscape, Nat Commun, 15, 6405, 10.1038/s41467-024-50712-3 · DOI
  19. K Ding, 2024, Machine learning-guided co-optimization of fitness and diversity facilitates combinatorial library design in enzyme engineering, Nat Commun, 15, 6392, 10.1038/s41467-024-50698-y · DOI
  20. Flier F v d, Estell D, Pricelius S, Dankmeyer L, Thans S v S, Mulder H. Enzyme structure correlates with variant effect predictability. 2024. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.09.25.559319v2 · DOI
  21. C Dallago, 2021, FLIP: benchmark tasks in fitness landscape inference for proteins
  22. NC Wu, 2016, Adaptation in protein fitness landscapes is facilitated by indirect paths, Elife, 5
  23. M Li, 2023, SESNet: sequence-structure feature-integrated deep learning method for data-efficient protein engineering, J Cheminform, 15, 12, 10.1186/s13321-023-00688-x · DOI
  24. Y Luo, 2021, ECNet is an evolutionary context-integrated deep learning framework for protein engineering, Nat Commun, 12, 5743, 10.1038/s41467-021-25976-8 · DOI
  25. Gelman S, Johnson B, Freschlin C, D’Costa S, Gitter A, Romero PA. Biophysics-based protein language models for protein engineering. 2024. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.03.15.585128v1 · DOI
  26. S Kirkpatrick, 1983, Optimization by simulated annealing, Science, 220, 671, 10.1126/science.220.4598.671 · DOI · Paper page
  27. D Bertsimas, 1993, Simulated annealing, Statist Sci, 8, 10.1214/ss/1177011077 · DOI
  28. S Sledzieski, 2024, Democratizing protein language models with parameter-efficient fine-tuning, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 121, 10.1073/pnas.2405840121 · DOI · Paper page
  29. R Schmirler, 2024, Fine-tuning protein language models boosts predictions across diverse tasks, Nat Commun, 15, 7407, 10.1038/s41467-024-51844-2 · DOI · Paper page
  30. R Guerois, 2002, Predicting changes in the stability of proteins and protein complexes: a study of more than 1000 mutations, J Mol Biol, 320, 369, 10.1016/S0022-2836(02)00442-4 · DOI · Paper page
  31. P Notin, 2024, Proteingym: large-scale benchmarks for protein fitness prediction and design, Adv Neural Inf Process Syst, 36
  32. R Nikam, 2021, ProThermDB: thermodynamic database for proteins and mutants revisited after 15 years, Nucleic Acids Res, 49, 10.1093/nar/gkaa1035 · DOI
  33. S Kawashima, 2008, AAindex: amino acid index database, progress report 2008, Nucleic Acids Res, 36

Metadata

Authors
Gomez-Uribe, C. A., Gado, J., & Islamov, M.
Corresponding author
Gomez-Uribe, Carlos A.
Venue
PLOS Computational Biology
Published
2025-06-05
Volume
21
Issue
6
Pages
e1013119
ISSN
  • 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7358
OpenAlex
W4411054928
Cited by
6
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
protein engineering, directed evolution, protein language models, sequence diversity, protein design
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Large Language Models, Algorithms, Mutation, Proteins, Protein Engineering, Neural Networks, Computer, Computational Biology

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