AI agent supervision of structural model building and refinement
Wu, K.-P.; Chueh, C.-K.
Show abstract
Structural model building and refinement need many decisions between different programs. These decisions often depend on an experienced researcher who knows how the programs work together and how to read experimental data. We used Claude Code with Claude Opus 5.5 to supervise this work for 24 cryo-EM and X-ray cases. The work finished in about 36 hours on one workstation. The agent prepared the inputs, ran established programs, read the validation results, compared candidate models and chose the next step. For 15 deposited cryo-EM models with weak starting geometry, the median MolProbity score improved from 2.62 to 1.76. For three crystal structures, the agent models came close to the published Rfree values. Chemical information such as ligands, ions and modifications must be provided by the researcher, in the same way as the sequence. With this information, the agent can place and check these components. These results show that agent supervision is acceptable when every decision can be inspected. The researcher makes the final scientific judgment. We suggest practical requirements for this kind of use. Future AI agents may help researchers obtain high quality and reliable structures of biological macromolecules.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- CaBLAM for CryoEM Chiropraxis, UnDowser to Rethink \"Waters\", and NGL Viewer to Recapture Online 3D Graphics in MolProbity Validation 95%
- DSSP 4: FAIR annotation of protein secondary structure 94%
- The importance of residue-level filtering, and the Top2018 best-parts dataset of high-quality protein residues 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Namdinator - Automatic Molecular Dynamics flexible fitting of structural models into cryo-EM and crystallography experimental maps 95%
- Identification of unknown proteins in X-ray crystallography and cryo-EM 95%
- A comparative anatomy of protein crystals: lessons from the automatic processing of 56,000 samples 94%
"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.