Cited by 12Protein Structure and DynamicsMachine Learning in BioinformaticsEnzyme Structure and Function

AlphaFold Blindness to Topological Barriers Affects Its Ability to Correctly Predict Proteins’ Topology

Open access
Dabrowski-Tumanski, Pawel, Stasiak, Andrzej·2023·Molecules

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

AlphaFold is a groundbreaking deep learning tool for protein structure prediction. It achieved remarkable accuracy in modeling many 3D structures while taking as the user input only the known amino acid sequence of proteins in question. Intriguingly though, in the early steps of each individual structure prediction procedure, AlphaFold does not respect topological barriers that, in real proteins, result from the reciprocal impermeability of polypeptide chains. This study aims to investigate how this failure to respect topological barriers affects AlphaFold predictions with respect to the topology of protein chains. We focus on such classes of proteins that, during their natural folding, reproducibly form the same knot type on their linear polypeptide chain, as revealed by their crystallographic analysis. We use partially artificial test constructs in which the mutual non-permeability of polypeptide chains should not permit the formation of complex composite knots during natural protein folding. We find that despite the formal impossibility that the protein folding process could produce such knots, AlphaFold predicts these proteins to form complex composite knots. Our study underscores the necessity for cautious interpretation and further validation of topological features in protein structures predicted by AlphaFold.

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 · 10.3390/molecules28227462

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Dabrowski-Tumanski, P., & Stasiak, A.
Affiliations
  • Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, School of Exact Sciences, Cardinal Wyszynski University in Warsaw, Wóycickiego 1/3, 01-938 Warsaw, Poland
  • SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (CH)
Corresponding author
Stasiak, Andrzej
Venue
Molecules
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-11-07
Volume
28
Issue
22
Pages
7462
ISSN
1420-3049 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4388453703
Cited by
12
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecules (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion, cc-by)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Enzyme Structure and Function
Keywords
AlphaFold, protein topology prediction, topological barriers, protein knots, composite knots, protein folding, deep learning protein structure prediction
MeSH terms
Models, Molecular, Peptides, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Protein Folding

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