Back

Benchmarking of AlphaFold2 accuracy self-estimates as empirical quality measures and model ranking indicators and their comparison with independent model quality assessment programs.

Edmunds, N. S.; McGuffin, L. J.; Genc, A. G.

2023-12-15 bioinformatics
10.1101/2023.12.15.571846 bioRxiv
Show abstract

MotivationDespite an increase in the accuracy of predicted protein structures following the development of AlphaFold2, there remains a gap in the accuracy of predicted model quality assessment scores when compared to those generated with reference to experimental structures. The predictions of model accuracy scores generated by AlphaFold2, plDDT and pTM, have become familiar descriptors of model quality. However, at CASP15 some modelling groups noticed a variation in these scores for models of very similar observed quality, particularly for quaternary structures. There have also been a number of methods describing adaptations of the AlphaFold2 algorithm to purposes such as refinement by custom template recycling and model quality assessment using a similar method of template input. In this study we compare plDDT and pTM to their observed counterparts lDDT (including lDDT-C and lDDT-oligo) and TM-score to examine whether they retain their reliability across the whole scoring range for both tertiary and quaternary structures and in situations where the AlphaFold2 algorithm is adapted to customised functionality. In addition, we explore the accuracy with which plDDT and pTM rank AlphaFold2 tertiary and quaternary models and whether these can be improved by the independent model quality assessment programs ModFOLD9 and ModFOLDdock. ResultsFor tertiary structures it was found that plDDT was an accurate descriptor of model quality when compared to observed lDDT-C scores (Pearson {rho} = 0.97). Additionally, plDDT achieved a tertiary structure ranking agreement with observed scores of 0.34 as measured by true positive rate (TPR) and ModFOLD9 offered similar but not improved performance. However, the accuracy of plDDT (Pearson {rho} = 0.67) and pTM (Pearson {rho} = 0.70) became more variable for quaternary structures quality assessment where overprediction was seen with both scores for models of lower quality and underprediction was also seen with pTM for models of higher quality. Importantly, ModFOLDdock was able to improve upon AF2-Multimer quaternary structure model ranking as measured by both TM-score (TPR 0.34) and lDDT-oligo (TPR 0.43). Finally, evidence is presented for an increase in variability of both plDDT and pTM when custom template recycling is used, and that this variation is more pronounced for quaternary structures.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
242 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.6%
2
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.7%
3
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
88 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.8%
4
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.7%
5
Protein Science
246 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.3%
6
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 34%
4.0%
7
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
238 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
8
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
9
Bioinformatics Advances
203 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
10
Computational Biology and Chemistry
28 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
11
Journal of Molecular Biology
232 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
12
Journal of Computational Chemistry
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
13
Journal of Cheminformatics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
14
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.1%
15
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
16
ACS Omega
105 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
17
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
167 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
18
Molecules
39 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
19
Structure
193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
20
BMC Bioinformatics
457 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
21
Acta Crystallographica Section D Structural Biology
59 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
22
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
140 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
23
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 66%
1.1%
24
Frontiers in Genetics
230 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
25
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
102 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
26
Biomolecules
100 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
27
Briefings in Bioinformatics
354 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
28
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
29
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
30
Journal of Structural Biology
64 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%