Back

Resolution-standardized evaluation of ligand atomic coordinates in crystallographic structures using machine learning

Miyaguchi, I.; Hata, H.; Kuribayashi, T.; Takahashi, S.; Kashima, A.; Murasaki, K.; Matsumoto, S.; Terayama, K.; Ohta, M.; Ikeguchi, M.

2026-08-20 molecular biology
10.64898/2026.08.17.745351 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Accurate assessment of ligand coordinate-density consistency across different resolutions remains challenging in macromolecular crystallography. We introduce the atomic Box Correlation Coefficient (aBCC), an atom-level metric for evaluating the consistency between ligand atomic coordinates and electron density in a resolution-standardized framework. To predict aBCC values from electron-density maps, we developed QAEmap, a machine-learning model based on three-dimensional convolutional neural networks (3D-CNNs). The model was trained using Fourier-truncated electron-density maps and corresponding ligand coordinates generated from high-resolution structures in the Protein Data Bank. It was evaluated using both Fourier-truncated electron-density maps and experimentally determined PDB structures. was evaluated using both Fourier-truncated electron-density maps and experimentally determined PDB structures.The prediction accuracy gradually decreased with decreasing resolution, but remained reliable up to [~]3.5 [A]. These results demonstrate that aBCC enables resolution-standardized atom-wise evaluation of coordinate-density consistency across different resolutions and provide a foundation for further development and refinement of machine learning-based coordinate validation. SynopsisWe introduce the atomic box correlation coefficient (aBCC), a machine learning-based metric for the resolution-standardized atom-level evaluation of ligand coordinate-density consistency in crystallographic structures. aBCC provides a common framework for assessing and communicating the local coordinate reliability between structural biologists and researchers in structure-based drug discovery.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.