From Anfinsen to AlphaFold:
48 years of protein structure prediction
In July 2021 DeepMind published the AlphaFold 2 paper in Nature, predicting the three-dimensional structure of proteins from their amino-acid sequence with near-experimental accuracy. Half of the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry went to Demis Hassabis and John Jumper for protein structure prediction, the other half to David Baker for computational protein design.
That step rests on half a century of human work: Anfinsen showed that sequence determines structure; X-ray crystallography, NMR and cryo-EM solved structure after structure, and the Protein Data Bank opened them to the world; the CASP experiment drove prediction methods for over two decades; coevolution analysis read residue contacts out of sequences. The paper lists 84 references. We traced the people behind every one.
The AI result sits at the top; below it are the human works it cites, by year, back to 1973. Gold tags mark Nobel laureates in Chemistry; open “How it is cited” for the sentences in the paper.
How it is cited (3)
Despite recent progress existing methods fall far short of atomic accuracy, especially when no homologous structure is available.
The prediction of protein structures has had a long and varied development, which is extensively covered in a number of reviews.
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
The BERT objective is trained jointly with the normal PDB structure loss on the same training examples and is not pre-trained, in contrast to recent independent work.
How it is cited (3)
In the companion paper additional quantification of the reliability of pLDDT as a confidence measure is provided. d, Correlation between pTM and full chain TM-score.
The other substantial limitation that we have observed is that AlphaFold is much weaker for proteins that have few intra-chain or homotypic contacts compared to the number of heterotypic contacts (further details are provided in a companion paper).
This opens up the exciting possibility of predicting structures at the proteome-scale and beyond—in a companion paper we demonstrate the application of AlphaFold to the entire human proteome.
How it is cited (1)
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
A few recent studies have been developed to predict the 3D coordinates directly but the accuracy of these approaches does not match traditional, hand-crafted structure prediction pipelines.
How it is cited (1)
In parallel, the success of attention-based networks for language processing and, more recently, computer vision has inspired the exploration of attention-based methods for interpreting protein sequences.
How it is cited (1)
AlphaFold has already demonstrated its utility to the experimental community, both for molecular replacement and for interpreting cryogenic electron microscopy maps.
How it is cited (1)
AlphaFold has already demonstrated its utility to the experimental community, both for molecular replacement and for interpreting cryogenic electron microscopy maps.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (1)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
How it is cited (2)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
For MSA lookup at both training and prediction time, we used Uniref90 v.2020_01, BFD, Uniclust30 v.2018_08 and MGnify v.2018_12.
How it is cited (3)
Despite recent progress existing methods fall far short of atomic accuracy, especially when no homologous structure is available.
The neural network AlphaFold that we developed was entered into the CASP14 assessment (May–July 2020; entered under the team name ‘AlphaFold2’ and a completely different model from our CASP13 AlphaFold system).
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
We validated an entirely redesigned version of our neural network-based model, AlphaFold, in the challenging 14th Critical Assessment of protein Structure Prediction (CASP14) demonstrating accuracy competitive with experimental structures in a majority of cases and greatly outperforming other methods.
How it is cited (1)
The physical interaction programme heavily integrates our understanding of molecular driving forces into either thermodynamic or kinetic simulation of protein physics or statistical approximations thereof.
How it is cited (1)
The AlphaFold architecture is able to train to high accuracy using only supervised learning on PDB data, but we are able to enhance accuracy (Fig. 4a) using an approach similar to noisy student self-distillation.
How it is cited (1)
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
First, 2,423,213,294 protein sequences were collected from UniProt (Swiss-Prot&TrEMBL, 2017-11) a soil reference protein catalogue and the marine eukaryotic reference catalogue and clustered to 30% sequence identity, while enforcing a 90% alignment coverage of the shorter sequences using MMseqs2/Linclust.
How it is cited (1)
For neural network construction, running and other analyses, we used TensorFlow Sonnet NumPy Python and Colab.
How it is cited (1)
Per-residue Neff values were obtained by counting the number of non-gap residues in the MSA for this position and weighting the sequences using the Neff scheme with a threshold of 80% sequence identity measured on the region that is non-gap in either sequence.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (2)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
First, 2,423,213,294 protein sequences were collected from UniProt (Swiss-Prot&TrEMBL, 2017-11) a soil reference protein catalogue and the marine eukaryotic reference catalogue and clustered to 30% sequence identity, while enforcing a 90% alignment coverage of the shorter sequences using MMseqs2/Linclust.
How it is cited (1)
Despite recent progress existing methods fall far short of atomic accuracy, especially when no homologous structure is available.
How it is cited (1)
Despite recent progress existing methods fall far short of atomic accuracy, especially when no homologous structure is available.
How it is cited (1)
The CASP assessment is carried out biennially using recently solved structures that have not been deposited in the PDB or publicly disclosed so that it is a blind test for the participating methods, and has long served as the gold-standard assessment for the accuracy of structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
In contrast to previous work this operation is applied within every block rather than once in the network, which enables the continuous communication from the evolving MSA representation to the pair representation.
How it is cited (2)
In particular, we add an extra logit bias to axial attention to include the ‘missing edge’ of the triangle and we define a non-attention update operation ‘triangle multiplicative update’ that uses two edges to update the missing third edge (see Supplementary Methods 1.6.5 for details).
In parallel, the success of attention-based networks for language processing and, more recently, computer vision has inspired the exploration of attention-based methods for interpreting protein sequences.
How it is cited (2)
Additionally, we randomly mask out or mutate individual residues within the MSA and have a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT)-style objective to predict the masked elements of the MSA sequences.
Second, we use random masking on the input MSAs and require the network to reconstruct the masked regions from the output MSA representation using a BERT-like loss.
How it is cited (1)
The prediction of protein structures has had a long and varied development, which is extensively covered in a number of reviews.
How it is cited (1)
A few recent studies have been developed to predict the 3D coordinates directly but the accuracy of these approaches does not match traditional, hand-crafted structure prediction pipelines.
How it is cited (1)
A few recent studies have been developed to predict the 3D coordinates directly but the accuracy of these approaches does not match traditional, hand-crafted structure prediction pipelines.
How it is cited (1)
A few recent studies have been developed to predict the 3D coordinates directly but the accuracy of these approaches does not match traditional, hand-crafted structure prediction pipelines.
How it is cited (1)
A few recent studies have been developed to predict the 3D coordinates directly but the accuracy of these approaches does not match traditional, hand-crafted structure prediction pipelines.
How it is cited (1)
In parallel, the success of attention-based networks for language processing and, more recently, computer vision has inspired the exploration of attention-based methods for interpreting protein sequences.
How it is cited (1)
In parallel, the success of attention-based networks for language processing and, more recently, computer vision has inspired the exploration of attention-based methods for interpreting protein sequences.
How it is cited (1)
A related construction that uses classic geometric invariants to construct pairwise features in place of the learned 3D points has been applied to protein design.
How it is cited (2)
For finding template structures at prediction time, we used a copy of the PDB downloaded on 14 May 2020, and the PDB70 clustering database downloaded on 13 May 2020.
For MSA search on BFD + Uniclust30, and template search against PDB70, we used HHBlits and HHSearch from hh-suite v.3.0-beta.3 (version 14/07/2017).
How it is cited (3)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
This bioinformatics approach has benefited greatly from the steady growth of experimental protein structures deposited in the Protein Data Bank (PDB) the explosion of genomic sequencing and the rapid development of deep learning techniques to interpret these correlations.
Our models were trained on a copy of the PDB downloaded on 28 August 2019.
How it is cited (2)
First, 2,423,213,294 protein sequences were collected from UniProt (Swiss-Prot&TrEMBL, 2017-11) a soil reference protein catalogue and the marine eukaryotic reference catalogue and clustered to 30% sequence identity, while enforcing a 90% alignment coverage of the shorter sequences using MMseqs2/Linclust.
Second, we added 166,510,624 representative protein sequences from Metaclust NR (2017-05; discarding all sequences shorter than 150 residues) by aligning them against the cluster representatives using MMseqs2.
How it is cited (1)
We show experimental structures from the PDB with accession numbers 6Y4F 6YJ1 6VR4 6SK0 6FES 6W6W 6T1Z and 7JTL.
How it is cited (2)
Despite recent progress existing methods fall far short of atomic accuracy, especially when no homologous structure is available.
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (4)
In this procedure, we use a trained network to predict the structure of around 350,000 diverse sequences from Uniclust30 and make a new dataset of predicted structures filtered to a high-confidence subset.
Third, for each of the clusters, we computed an MSA using FAMSA and computed the HMMs following the Uniclust HH-suite database protocol.
For MSA lookup at both training and prediction time, we used Uniref90 v.2020_01, BFD, Uniclust30 v.2018_08 and MGnify v.2018_12.
For sequence distillation, we used Uniclust30 v.2018_08 to construct a distillation structure dataset.
How it is cited (1)
In parallel, the success of attention-based networks for language processing and, more recently, computer vision has inspired the exploration of attention-based methods for interpreting protein sequences.
How it is cited (1)
Second, we added 166,510,624 representative protein sequences from Metaclust NR (2017-05; discarding all sequences shorter than 150 residues) by aligning them against the cluster representatives using MMseqs2.
How it is cited (1)
For constrained relaxation of structures, we used OpenMM v.7.3.1 with the Amber99sb force field.
How it is cited (1)
The iterative refinement using the whole network (which we term ‘recycling’ and is related to approaches in computer vision) contributes markedly to accuracy with minor extra training time (see Supplementary Methods 1.8 for details).
How it is cited (1)
These approaches effectively leverage the rapid improvement in computer vision systems by treating the problem of protein structure prediction as converting an ‘image’ of evolutionary couplings to an ‘image’ of the protein distance matrix and then integrating the distance predictions into a heuristic system that produces the final 3D coordinate prediction.
How it is cited (1)
Third, for each of the clusters, we computed an MSA using FAMSA and computed the HMMs following the Uniclust HH-suite database protocol.
How it is cited (1)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
How it is cited (1)
For MSA lookup at both training and prediction time, we used Uniref90 v.2020_01, BFD, Uniclust30 v.2018_08 and MGnify v.2018_12.
How it is cited (1)
For neural network construction, running and other analyses, we used TensorFlow Sonnet NumPy Python and Colab.
How it is cited (1)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
How it is cited (2)
Empirically, this final relaxation does not improve the accuracy of the model as measured by the global distance test (GDT) or lDDT-Cα but does remove distracting stereochemical violations without the loss of accuracy.
The predicted structure is compared to the true structure from the PDB in terms of lDDT metric as this metric reports the domain accuracy without requiring a domain segmentation of chain structures.
How it is cited (2)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
These approaches effectively leverage the rapid improvement in computer vision systems by treating the problem of protein structure prediction as converting an ‘image’ of evolutionary couplings to an ‘image’ of the protein distance matrix and then integrating the distance predictions into a heuristic system that produces the final 3D coordinate prediction.
How it is cited (1)
The prediction of protein structures has had a long and varied development, which is extensively covered in a number of reviews.
How it is cited (2)
Inputs to the network are the primary sequence, sequences from evolutionarily related proteins in the form of a MSA created by standard tools including jackhmmer and HHBlits and 3D atom coordinates of a small number of homologous structures (templates) where available.
For MSA search on BFD + Uniclust30, and template search against PDB70, we used HHBlits and HHSearch from hh-suite v.3.0-beta.3 (version 14/07/2017).
How it is cited (2)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
These approaches effectively leverage the rapid improvement in computer vision systems by treating the problem of protein structure prediction as converting an ‘image’ of evolutionary couplings to an ‘image’ of the protein distance matrix and then integrating the distance predictions into a heuristic system that produces the final 3D coordinate prediction.
How it is cited (1)
For MSA search on Uniref90 and clustered MGnify, we used jackhmmer from HMMER3.
How it is cited (1)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
How it is cited (1)
The iterative refinement using the whole network (which we term ‘recycling’ and is related to approaches in computer vision) contributes markedly to accuracy with minor extra training time (see Supplementary Methods 1.8 for details).
How it is cited (1)
Inputs to the network are the primary sequence, sequences from evolutionarily related proteins in the form of a MSA created by standard tools including jackhmmer and HHBlits and 3D atom coordinates of a small number of homologous structures (templates) where available.
How it is cited (2)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
These approaches effectively leverage the rapid improvement in computer vision systems by treating the problem of protein structure prediction as converting an ‘image’ of evolutionary couplings to an ‘image’ of the protein distance matrix and then integrating the distance predictions into a heuristic system that produces the final 3D coordinate prediction.
How it is cited (1)
Predicting the three-dimensional structure that a protein will adopt based solely on its amino acid sequence—the structure prediction component of the ‘protein folding problem’ —has been an important open research problem for more than 50 years.
How it is cited (2)
Exact enforcement of peptide bond geometry is only achieved in the post-prediction relaxation of the structure by gradient descent in the Amber force field.
For constrained relaxation of structures, we used OpenMM v.7.3.1 with the Amber99sb force field.
How it is cited (2)
We also find that the global superposition metric template modelling score (TM-score) can be accurately estimated (Fig. 2d).
Domain accuracies in CASP are reported as GDT and the TM-score is used as a full chain global superposition metric.
How it is cited (2)
Empirically, this final relaxation does not improve the accuracy of the model as measured by the global distance test (GDT) or lDDT-Cα but does remove distracting stereochemical violations without the loss of accuracy.
Domain accuracies in CASP are reported as GDT and the TM-score is used as a full chain global superposition metric.
How it is cited (1)
Through an enormous experimental effort the structures of around 100,000 unique proteins have been determined but this represents a small fraction of the billions of known protein sequences.
How it is cited (2)
The prediction of protein structures has had a long and varied development, which is extensively covered in a number of reviews.
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
The CASP assessment is carried out biennially using recently solved structures that have not been deposited in the PDB or publicly disclosed so that it is a blind test for the participating methods, and has long served as the gold-standard assessment for the accuracy of structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
How it is cited (1)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
How it is cited (1)
The physical interaction programme heavily integrates our understanding of molecular driving forces into either thermodynamic or kinetic simulation of protein physics or statistical approximations thereof.
How it is cited (2)
The prediction of protein structures has had a long and varied development, which is extensively covered in a number of reviews.
Despite the long history of applying neural networks to structure prediction they have only recently come to improve structure prediction.
How it is cited (1)
The evolutionary programme has provided an alternative in recent years, in which the constraints on protein structure are derived from bioinformatics analysis of the evolutionary history of proteins, homology to solved structures and pairwise evolutionary correlations.
How it is cited (1)
Predicting the three-dimensional structure that a protein will adopt based solely on its amino acid sequence—the structure prediction component of the ‘protein folding problem’ —has been an important open research problem for more than 50 years.
How it is cited (1)
In parallel, the success of attention-based networks for language processing and, more recently, computer vision has inspired the exploration of attention-based methods for interpreting protein sequences.
How it is cited (1)
For neural network construction, running and other analyses, we used TensorFlow Sonnet NumPy Python and Colab.
How it is cited (1)
For neural network construction, running and other analyses, we used TensorFlow Sonnet NumPy Python and Colab.
How it is cited (1)
For neural network construction, running and other analyses, we used TensorFlow Sonnet NumPy Python and Colab.
How it is cited (1)
These timings are measured using our open-source code, and the open-source code is notably faster than the version we ran in CASP14 as we now use the XLA compiler.
Ranked by reference entries by default: the paper listing one of their works counts once.
- Johannes Söding6
- Martin Steinegger5
- Yang Zhang5
- Chris Sander4
- Milot Mirdita3
- David T. Jones3
- Debora S. Marks3
- Torsten Schwede3
- John Moult3
- Krzysztof Fidelis3
- Alex Bridgland2
- Alexander W. R. Nelson2
- Andrew W. Senior2
- Augustin Žídek2
- Chongli Qin2
- David Silver2
- Demis HassabisNobel Chemistry 20242
- Hugo Penedones2
- James Kirkpatrick2
- John JumperNobel Chemistry 20242
- Karen Simonyan2
- Koray Kavukcuoglu2
- Laurent Sifre2
- Pushmeet Kohli2
- Richard Evans2
- Robin Pearce2
- Steve Crossan2
- Stig Petersen2
- Tim Green2
- Carlos Simmerling2
- Jinbo Xu2
- Thomas A. Hopf2
- Andreas Plückthun2
- Andrei N. Lupas2
- Andriy Kryshtafovych2
- Chengxin Zhang2
- J. Ingraham2
- Jin Li2
- Ken A. Dill2
- Marcus D. Hartmann2
- Maya Topf2
- Mohammed AlQuraishi2
- Patrick Ernst2
- Sean R. Eddy2
- The UniProt Consortium2
- Wei Zheng2
- Xiao-chen Bai2
- Yang Li2
- Yuqi Wang2
- Clovis Galiez1
- Lars von den Driesch1
- Maria J. Martin1
- K. Tunyasuvunakool1
- wwPDB Consortium1
- A. Zemla1
- Adrian Roitberg1
- Alessandro Barbato1
- Alex L Mitchell1
- Alex Shlemov1
- Alexandre Almeida1
- Alfonso Valencia1
- Alla Lapidus1
- Andrea Pagnani1
- Andreas Biegert1
- Andreas Hauser1
- Anton Korobeynikov1
- Asim Okur1
- Bentley Strockbine1
- Daniel W. A. Buchan1
- Domenico Cozzetto1
- Ekaterina Sakharova1
- Guy Cochrane1
- Harald Vöhringer1
- Hendrik Szurmant1
- J. Devlin1
- James A. Hoch1
- Jeffrey Skolnick1
- Josephine Burgin1
- K. Lee1
- K. Toutanova1
- Lorna J Richardson1
- Lucy J. Colwell1
- M.-W. Chang1
- Marco Biasini1
- Markus Meier1
- Martin Beracochea1
- Martin Weigt1
- Massimiliano Pontil1
- Maxim Scheremetjew1
- Michael R Crusoe1
- Michael Remmert1
- Miguel Boland1
- Ning Qian1
- Olga Kunyavskaya1
- Osvaldo Olmea1
- Piero Fariselli1
- Renyu Zhang1
- Riccardo Zecchina1
- Rita Casadio1
- Robert A. White1
- Robert Abel1
- Robert D Finn1
- Robert Sheridan1
- Sheng Wang1
- Simon C Potter1
- Siqi Sun1
- Stephan J. Haunsberger1
- Terence Hwa1
- Terrence J. Sejnowski1
- Valerio Mariani1
- Varsha Kale1
- Viktor Hornak1
- Z. Huang1
- Zhen Li1
- A. J. Riesselman1
- A. Sobieraj1
- A. Vaswani1
- A.C. Bloomer1
- A.M. Lesk1
- Aaron KlugNobel Chemistry 19821
- Adam Gudyś1
- Adam J. Simpkin1
- Agnieszka Debudaj-Grabysz1
- Ahmed Elnaggar1
- Alexander Rives1
- Alexander Wlodawer1
- Alexandra T. Barbour1
- Allan Haldane1
- Allison E. McKay1
- Allison N. Norsworthy1
- Alper Kucukural1
- Ambrish Roy1
- Andrej Šali1
- Andrew C. Simmonett1
- Andrew Hutchin1
- Arina V. Drobysheva1
- Arthur J. Zaug1
- Badri Adhikari1
- Baris E. Suzek1
- Bernard R. Brooks1
- Björn Wallner1
- Brian Kuhlman1
- Burkhard Rost1
- C. Lawrence Zitnick1
- Cathy H. Wu1
- Charles R. Harris1
- Chaya D. Stern1
- Chiara Rapisarda1
- Chloé Martens1
- Christian B. AnfinsenNobel Chemistry 19721
- Christian Dallago1
- Christoph Gohlke1
- Ci Ji Lim1
- Claudio Mirabello1
- Cosmo Z. Buffalo1
- Cédric Govaerts1
- D. Altschuh1
- Daniel J. Rigden1
- David BakerNobel Chemistry 20241
- David Cournapeau1
- Deborah S. Wuttke1
- Demi Guo1
- Dmitrii Nechaev1
- Dong-Jun Yu1
- E. Hovy1
- Elon Portugaly1
- Emel Ficici1
- Emelie Nilsson1
- Emiliano Brini1
- Eric Cascales1
- Eric Durand1
- Eric W. Bell1
- Eric Wieser1
- Ethan C. Alley1
- Eugene V. Koonin1
- Evgeny I. Klimuk1
- F. L. Drake1
- Florian Matthes1
- G. Van Rossum1
- George M. Church1
- Giorgio E. Tamò1
- Greg McMullan1
- Grigory Khimulya1
- H. Wang1
- Hahnbeom Park1
- Hameer Abbasi1
- Han Remaut1
- Harry L. T. Mobley1
- Hassane S. Mchaourab1
- Hongbo Zhu1
- Hongzhan Huang1
- I.N. Shindyalov1
- Ivan Anishchenko1
- J. Carreira1
- J. Malik1
- J. Sun1
- Jaime Fernández del Río1
- James H. Hurley1
- Jan T. Pedersen1
- Jason Liu1
- Jason Swails1
- Jerry Ma1
- Jianlin Cheng1
- Jianyi Yang1
- Jie Hou1
- Joana Pereira1
- John D. Chodera1
- Jose A. Rodriguez1
- Joshua Meier1
- José D. Faraldo-Gómez1
- Julia Chamot‐Rooke1
- Julian Taylor1
- K. Fragkiadaki1
- K. He1
- K. Jarrod Millman1
- Karen J. Goodrich1
- Karin Holmfeldt1
- Kevin Sheppard1
- Kira S. Makarova1
- Konstantin V. Severinov1
- Kurt WüthrichNobel Chemistry 20021
- Kyle A. Beauchamp1
- L Steven Johnson1
- Laure Journet1
- Lee-Ping Wang1
- Leonid Minakhin1
- Luciano A. Abriata1
- M. Dunne1
- M. Gupta1
- M. J. Loessner1
- M. Reynolds1
- M. Scott Shell1
- M.-T. Luong1
- Manfred J. Sippl1
- Marc Allaire1
- Maria L. Sokolova1
- Maria V. Yakunina1
- Mariusz Jaskolski1
- Mark Wiebe1
- Marten H. van Kerkwijk1
- Martial Rey1
- Martín Abadi1
- Matteo Dal Peraro1
- Matthew Brett1
- Matthew McPartlon1
- Matthew P. Harrigan1
- Matthieu Masureel1
- Matti Picus1
- Matvei V. Kolesnik1
- Melanie M. Pearson1
- Michael C. Breed1
- Michael C. Thompson1
- Michael Heinzinger1
- Mohammad ElGamacy1
- Murray Coles1
- Myle Ott1
- N.A. Kolchanov1
- Natalya Yutin1
- Nathaniel J. Smith1
- Nicolas Flaugnatti1
- Nina Serr1
- P. Agrawal1
- Pauli Virtanen1
- Pearu Peterson1
- Peter B. McGarvey1
- Peter Eastman1
- Petr G. Leiman1
- Philip Bradley1
- Pierre Gérard-Marchant1
- Pierre Legrand1
- Q. V. Le1
- Q. Xie1
- R. Barzilay1
- R. Rao1
- Rafal P. Wiewiora1
- Ralf Gommers1
- Richard A. Stein1
- Richard Judson1
- Richard M. Hooy1
- Rob Fergus1
- Robert Kern1
- Robert T. McGibbon1
- Ronan M. Keegan1
- Rémi Fronzes1
- S. Banu Ozkan1
- S. M. Mortuza1
- S. Ren1
- Sebastian Berg1
- Sebastian Deorowicz1
- Sergei Borukhov1
- Sergey Ovchinnikov1
- Siddharth Goyal1
- Sjors H.W Scheres1
- Sofia A. Panafidina1
- Solène G Beauvois1
- Stefan D. Knight1
- Stephan Hoyer1
- Stéfan J. van der Walt1
- Stéphane Canaan1
- Surojit Biswas1
- T. Jaakkola1
- Thomas G. Flower1
- Thomas R. Cech1
- Thomas R. Weikl1
- Tianqi Wu1
- Todd O. Yeates1
- Tom L. Blundell1
- Tom Sercu1
- Travis E. Oliphant1
- Tyler Reddy1
- V. K. Garg1
- Viet Anh Nguyen1
- Vijay S. Pande1
- Vincent Debruycker1
- Wangshu Jiang1
- Warren Weckesser1
- Wimal Ubhayasekera1
- X. Zhang1
- Xiaogen Zhou1
- Xuefeng Ren1
- Yutong Zhao1
- Zbigniew Dauter1
- Zeming Lin1
- Zhenling Peng1
- Zhuowen Tu1
Original numbering; the number on the right is how often the entry is cited in the text and figure legends. Eight entries abbreviate their authors with “et al.” in the original and cannot be completed from a DOI; they show the first author only.
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
- 1×Michael C. Thompson, Todd O. Yeates, Jose A. Rodriguez, Advances in methods for atomic resolution macromolecular structure determination (2020)
- 1×Xiao-chen Bai, Greg McMullan, Sjors H.W Scheres, How cryo-EM is revolutionizing structural biology (2015)
- 1×Mariusz Jaskolski, Zbigniew Dauter, Alexander Wlodawer, A brief history of macromolecular crystallography, illustrated by a family tree and its Nobel fruits (2014)
- 1×Kurt Wüthrich, The way to NMR structures of proteins (2001)
- 3×wwPDB Consortium, Protein Data Bank: the single global archive for 3D macromolecular structure data (2018)
- 2×Alex L Mitchell, Alexandre Almeida, Martin Beracochea, Miguel Boland, Josephine Burgin, Guy Cochrane …, MGnify: the microbiome analysis resource in 2020 (2020)
- 2×Martin Steinegger, Milot Mirdita, Johannes Söding, Protein-level assembly increases protein sequence recovery from metagenomic samples manyfold (2019)
- 1×Ken A. Dill, S. Banu Ozkan, M. Scott Shell, Thomas R. Weikl, The protein folding problem (2008)
- 1×Christian B. Anfinsen, Principles that govern the folding of protein chains (1973)
- 3×Andrew W. Senior, Richard Evans, John Jumper, James Kirkpatrick, Laurent Sifre, Tim Green …, Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning (2020)
- 2×Sheng Wang, Siqi Sun, Zhen Li, Renyu Zhang, Jinbo Xu, Accurate de novo prediction of protein contact map by ultra-deep learning model (2017)
- 1×Wei Zheng, Yang Li, Chengxin Zhang, Robin Pearce, S. M. Mortuza, Yang Zhang, Deep-learning contact-map guided protein structure prediction in CASP13 (2019)
- 1×Luciano A. Abriata, Giorgio E. Tamò, Matteo Dal Peraro, A further leap of improvement in tertiary structure prediction in CASP13 prompts new routes for future assessments (2019)
- 3×Robin Pearce, Yang Zhang, Deep learning techniques have significantly impacted protein structure prediction and protein design (2021)
- 1×J. Moult, K. Fidelis, A. Kryshtafovych, T. Schwede, M. Topf, Critical assessment of techniques for protein structure prediction, fourteenth round (2020)
- 1×Emiliano Brini, Carlos Simmerling, Ken Dill, Protein storytelling through physics (2020)
- 1×Manfred J. Sippl, Calculation of conformational ensembles from potentials of mean force. An approach to the knowledge-based prediction of local structures in globular proteins (1990)
- 1×Andrej Šali, Tom L. Blundell, Comparative protein modelling by satisfaction of spatial restraints (1993)
- 1×Ambrish Roy, Alper Kucukural, Yang Zhang, I-TASSER: a unified platform for automated protein structure and function prediction (2010)
- 1×D. Altschuh, A.M. Lesk, A.C. Bloomer, Aaron Klug, Correlation of co-ordinated amino acid substitutions with function in viruses related to tobacco mosaic virus (1987)
- 1×I.N. Shindyalov, N.A. Kolchanov, C. Sander, Can three-dimensional contacts in protein structures be predicted by analysis of correlated mutations? (1994)
- 2×Martin Weigt, Robert A. White, Hendrik Szurmant, James A. Hoch, Terence Hwa, Identification of direct residue contacts in protein–protein interaction by message passing (2009)
- 2×Debora S. Marks, Lucy J. Colwell, Robert Sheridan, Thomas A. Hopf, Andrea Pagnani, Riccardo Zecchina …, Protein 3D structure computed from evolutionary sequence variation (2011)
- 2×David T. Jones, Daniel W. A. Buchan, Domenico Cozzetto, Massimiliano Pontil, PSICOV: precise structural contact prediction using sparse inverse covariance estimation on large multiple sequence alignments (2012)
- 1×John Moult, Jan T. Pedersen, Richard Judson, Krzysztof Fidelis, A large-scale experiment to assess protein structure prediction methods (1995)
- 1×Andriy Kryshtafovych, Torsten Schwede, Maya Topf, Krzysztof Fidelis, John Moult, Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP)-round XIII (2019)
- 2×Yang Zhang, Jeffrey Skolnick, Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality (2004)
- 1×Zhuowen Tu, Xiang Bai, Auto-context and its application to high-level vision tasks and 3D brain image segmentation (2010)
- 1×J. Carreira, P. Agrawal, K. Fragkiadaki, J. Malik, Human pose estimation with iterative error feedback (2016)
- 1×Claudio Mirabello, Björn Wallner, rawMSA: end-to-end deep learning using raw multiple sequence alignments (2019)
- 2×Z. Huang et al., CCNet: criss-cross attention for semantic segmentation (2019)
- 2×Viktor Hornak, Robert Abel, Asim Okur, Bentley Strockbine, Adrian Roitberg, Carlos Simmerling, Comparison of multiple Amber force fields and development of improved protein backbone parameters (2006)
- 2×A. Zemla, LGA: a method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures (2003)
- 2×Valerio Mariani, Marco Biasini, Alessandro Barbato, Torsten Schwede, lDDT: a local superposition-free score for comparing protein structures and models using distance difference tests (2013)
- 1×Q. Xie, M.-T. Luong, E. Hovy, Q. V. Le, Self-training with noisy student improves imagenet classification (2020)
- 4×Milot Mirdita, Lars von den Driesch, Clovis Galiez, Maria J. Martin, Johannes Söding, Martin Steinegger, Uniclust databases of clustered and deeply annotated protein sequences and alignments (2017)
- 2×J. Devlin, M.-W. Chang, K. Lee, K. Toutanova, BERT: pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding (2019)
- 1×R. Rao et al., MSA transformer (2021)
- 3×K. Tunyasuvunakool et al., Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome (2021)
- 1×Brian Kuhlman, Philip Bradley, Advances in protein structure prediction and design (2019)
- 1×Debora S Marks, Thomas A Hopf, Chris Sander, Protein structure prediction from sequence variation (2012)
- 2×Ning Qian, Terrence J. Sejnowski, Predicting the secondary structure of globular proteins using neural network models (1988)
- 2×Piero Fariselli, Osvaldo Olmea, Alfonso Valencia, Rita Casadio, Prediction of contact maps with neural networks and correlated mutations (2001)
- 1×Jianyi Yang, Ivan Anishchenko, Hahnbeom Park, Zhenling Peng, Sergey Ovchinnikov, David Baker, Improved protein structure prediction using predicted interresidue orientations (2020)
- 1×Yang Li, Chengxin Zhang, Eric W. Bell, Wei Zheng, Xiaogen Zhou, Dong-Jun Yu …, Deducing high-accuracy protein contact-maps from a triplet of coevolutionary matrices through deep residual convolutional networks (2021)
- 1×K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, J. Sun, Deep residual learning for image recognition (2016)
- 1×Mohammed AlQuraishi, End-to-end differentiable learning of protein structure (2019)
- 1×Andrew W. Senior, Richard Evans, John Jumper, James Kirkpatrick, Laurent Sifre, Tim Green …, Protein structure prediction using multiple deep neural networks in the 13th Critical Assessment of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP13) (2019)
- 1×J. Ingraham, A. J. Riesselman, C. Sander, D. S. Marks, Learning protein structure with a differentiable simulator (2019)
- 1×J. Li, Universal transforming geometric network (2019)
- 1×Jinbo Xu, Matthew McPartlon, Jin Li, Improved protein structure prediction by deep learning irrespective of co-evolution information (2021)
- 1×A. Vaswani et al., Attention is all you need (2017)
- 1×H. Wang et al., Axial-deeplab: stand-alone axial-attention for panoptic segmentation ()
- 1×Ethan C. Alley, Grigory Khimulya, Surojit Biswas, Mohammed AlQuraishi, George M. Church, Unified rational protein engineering with sequence-based deep representation learning (2019)
- 1×Michael Heinzinger, Ahmed Elnaggar, Yu Wang, Christian Dallago, Dmitrii Nechaev, Florian Matthes …, Modeling aspects of the language of life through transfer-learning protein sequences (2019)
- 1×Alexander Rives, Joshua Meier, Tom Sercu, Siddharth Goyal, Zeming Lin, Jason Liu …, Biological structure and function emerge from scaling unsupervised learning to 250 million protein sequences (2021)
- 1×Joana Pereira, Adam J. Simpkin, Marcus D. Hartmann, Daniel J. Rigden, Ronan M. Keegan, Andrei N. Lupas, High-accuracy protein structure prediction in CASP14 (2021)
- 1×M. Gupta et al., CryoEM and AI reveal a structure of SARS-CoV-2 Nsp2, a multifunctional protein involved in key host processes (2021)
- 1×J. Ingraham, V. K. Garg, R. Barzilay, T. Jaakkola, Generative models for graph-based protein design (2019)
- 1×L Steven Johnson, Sean R Eddy, Elon Portugaly, Hidden Markov model speed heuristic and iterative HMM search procedure (2010)
- 2×Michael Remmert, Andreas Biegert, Andreas Hauser, Johannes Söding, HHblits: lightning-fast iterative protein sequence searching by HMM-HMM alignment (2012)
- 1×The UniProt Consortium, UniProt: the universal protein knowledgebase in 2021 (2020)
- 2×Martin Steinegger, Johannes Söding, Clustering huge protein sequence sets in linear time (2018)
- 1×Martin Steinegger, Johannes Söding, MMseqs2 enables sensitive protein sequence searching for the analysis of massive data sets (2017)
- 1×Sebastian Deorowicz, Agnieszka Debudaj-Grabysz, Adam Gudyś, FAMSA: fast and accurate multiple sequence alignment of huge protein families (2016)
- 2×Martin Steinegger, Markus Meier, Milot Mirdita, Harald Vöhringer, Stephan J. Haunsberger, Johannes Söding, HH-suite3 for fast remote homology detection and deep protein annotation (2019)
- 1×Baris E. Suzek, Yuqi Wang, Hongzhan Huang, Peter B. McGarvey, Cathy H. Wu, the UniProt Consortium, UniRef clusters: a comprehensive and scalable alternative for improving sequence similarity searches (2015)
- 1×Sean R. Eddy, Accelerated profile HMM searches (2011)
- 1×Peter Eastman, Jason Swails, John D. Chodera, Robert T. McGibbon, Yutong Zhao, Kyle A. Beauchamp …, OpenMM 7: rapid development of high performance algorithms for molecular dynamics (2017)
- 1×Martín Abadi et al., TensorFlow: large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems (2015)
- 1×M. Reynolds et al., Open sourcing Sonnet – a new library for constructing neural networks ()
- 1×Charles R. Harris, K. Jarrod Millman, Stéfan J. van der Walt, Ralf Gommers, Pauli Virtanen, David Cournapeau …, Array programming with NumPy (2020)
- 1×G. Van Rossum, F. L. Drake, Python 3 Reference Manual (CreateSpace, 2009). ()
- 1×, Bisong, E ()
- 1×, TensorFlow ()
- 1×Tianqi Wu, Jie Hou, Badri Adhikari, Jianlin Cheng, Analysis of several key factors influencing deep learning-based inter-residue contact prediction (2020)
- 1×Wangshu Jiang, Wimal Ubhayasekera, Michael C. Breed, Allison N. Norsworthy, Nina Serr, Harry L. T. Mobley …, MrpH, a new class of metal-binding adhesin, requires zinc to mediate biofilm formation (2020)
- 1×M. Dunne, P. Ernst, A. Sobieraj, A. Pluckthun, M. J. Loessner, The M23 peptidase domain of the Staphylococcal phage 2638A endolysin (2020)
- 1×Arina V. Drobysheva, Sofia A. Panafidina, Matvei V. Kolesnik, Evgeny I. Klimuk, Leonid Minakhin, Maria V. Yakunina …, Structure and function of virion RNA polymerase of a crAss-like phage (2021)
- 1×Nicolas Flaugnatti, Chiara Rapisarda, Martial Rey, Solène G Beauvois, Viet Anh Nguyen, Stéphane Canaan …, Structural basis for loading and inhibition of a bacterial T6SS phospholipase effector by the VgrG spike (2020)
- 1×Mohammad ElGamacy, Murray Coles, Patrick Ernst, Hongbo Zhu, Marcus D. Hartmann, Andreas Plückthun …, An interface-driven design strategy yields a novel, corrugated protein architecture (2018)
- 1×Ci Ji Lim, Alexandra T. Barbour, Arthur J. Zaug, Karen J. Goodrich, Allison E. McKay, Deborah S. Wuttke …, The structure of human CST reveals a decameric assembly bound to telomeric DNA (2020)
- 1×Vincent Debruycker, Andrew Hutchin, Matthieu Masureel, Emel Ficici, Chloé Martens, Pierre Legrand …, An embedded lipid in the multidrug transporter LmrP suggests a mechanism for polyspecificity (2020)
- 1×Thomas G. Flower, Cosmo Z. Buffalo, Richard M. Hooy, Marc Allaire, Xuefeng Ren, James H. Hurley, Structure of SARS-CoV-2 ORF8, a rapidly evolving immune evasion protein (2021)