Quantitative Biology > Biomolecules
[Submitted on 16 Sep 2021 (v1), last revised 28 Sep 2021 (this version, v3)]
Title:PDBench: Evaluating Computational Methods for Protein Sequence Design
View PDFAbstract:Proteins perform critical processes in all living systems: converting solar energy into chemical energy, replicating DNA, as the basis of highly performant materials, sensing and much more. While an incredible range of functionality has been sampled in nature, it accounts for a tiny fraction of the possible protein universe. If we could tap into this pool of unexplored protein structures, we could search for novel proteins with useful properties that we could apply to tackle the environmental and medical challenges facing humanity. This is the purpose of protein design.
Sequence design is an important aspect of protein design, and many successful methods to do this have been developed. Recently, deep-learning methods that frame it as a classification problem have emerged as a powerful approach. Beyond their reported improvement in performance, their primary advantage over physics-based methods is that the computational burden is shifted from the user to the developers, thereby increasing accessibility to the design method. Despite this trend, the tools for assessment and comparison of such models remain quite generic. The goal of this paper is to both address the timely problem of evaluation and to shine a spotlight, within the Machine Learning community, on specific assessment criteria that will accelerate impact.
We present a carefully curated benchmark set of proteins and propose a number of standard tests to assess the performance of deep learning based methods. Our robust benchmark provides biological insight into the behaviour of design methods, which is essential for evaluating their performance and utility. We compare five existing models with two novel models for sequence prediction. Finally, we test the designs produced by these models with AlphaFold2, a state-of-the-art structure-prediction algorithm, to determine if they are likely to fold into the intended 3D shapes.
Submission history
From: Christopher Wood [view email][v1] Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:20:03 UTC (798 KB)
[v2] Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:23:31 UTC (798 KB)
[v3] Tue, 28 Sep 2021 13:34:33 UTC (20,717 KB)
Current browse context:
q-bio.BM
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.