ArticlePLoS computational biology2017
Accurate De Novo Prediction of Protein Contact Map by Ultra-Deep Learning Model.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 414 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
414 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Protein Science Meets Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review and a Biochemical Meta-Analysis of an Inter-Field.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Pooled it
- Deep learning architectures achieve state-of-the-art (SOTA) accuracy in protein secondary structure prediction.Molecular diversity · 2026Review
- Opportunities for artificial intelligence and synthetic biology in designing living drug delivery systems.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence driven protein design and sustainable nanomedicine for advanced theranostics.Bioactive materials · 2026Review
- NEFFy: a versatile tool for computing the number of effective sequences.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Structural and immunogenic evaluation of silk proteins from Bombyx mori using advanced bioinformatics and deep learning for biomaterials applications.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2026Article
- The role of protein embeddings for protein-protein interaction prediction with graph neural networks.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- A Review and Experimental Analysis of Supervised Learning Systems and Methods for Protein-Protein Interaction Detection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Peptide-protein docking: from physics-based models to generative intelligence.Chemical communications (Cambridge, England) · 2026Review
- Profile of David Baker, Demis Hassabis, and John Jumper: 2024 Nobel laureates in chemistry.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- The Transcriptional Regulator Crt1 is Involved in The Pathogenic Lifestyle ofPolish journal of microbiology · 2026Article
- Mechanism of trans-envelope bacterial polysaccharide secretion in Class-3 outer-membrane polysaccharide export (OPX) protein systems.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Genome anchoring, retention, and release by neck proteins of Staphylococcus phage 812.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Large language models in bioinformatics: a comprehensive survey.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Review
- A Comprehensive Review on Homology Modelling in Drug Development: Methodologies, Tools, and Evaluation.Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry · 2026Review
- 20 Years of the ISCB Student Council Symposium: shaping computational biology and future leaders.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Article
- AlphaFold3 at CASP16.Proteins · 2026Article
- Protein Structure Prediction Methods.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- A comprehensive benchmarking of the AlphaFold3 for predicting biomacromolecules and their interactions.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Identification and understanding of allostery hotspots in proteins: Integration of deep mutational scanning and multi-faceted computational analyses.Journal of molecular biology · 2025Review
354 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationProtein contacts contain key information for the understanding of protein structure and function and thus, contact prediction from sequence is an important problem. Recently exciting progress has been made on this problem, but the predicted contacts for proteins without many sequence homologs is still of low quality and not very useful for de novo structure prediction.
methodThis paper presents a new deep learning method that predicts contacts by integrating both evolutionary coupling (EC) and sequence conservation information through an ultra-deep neural network formed by two deep residual neural networks. The first residual network conducts a series of 1-dimensional convolutional transformation of sequential features; the second residual network conducts a series of 2-dimensional convolutional transformation of pairwise information including output of the first residual network, EC information and pairwise potential. By using very deep residual networks, we can accurately model contact occurrence patterns and complex sequence-structure relationship and thus, obtain higher-quality contact prediction regardless of how many sequence homologs are available for proteins in question.
resultsOur method greatly outperforms existing methods and leads to much more accurate contact-assisted folding. Tested on 105 CASP11 targets, 76 past CAMEO hard targets, and 398 membrane proteins, the average top L long-range prediction accuracy obtained by our method, one representative EC method CCMpred and the CASP11 winner MetaPSICOV is 0.47, 0.21 and 0.30, respectively; the average top L/10 long-range accuracy of our method, CCMpred and MetaPSICOV is 0.77, 0.47 and 0.59, respectively. Ab initio folding using our predicted contacts as restraints but without any force fields can yield correct folds (i.e., TMscore>0.6) for 203 of the 579 test proteins, while that using MetaPSICOV- and CCMpred-predicted contacts can do so for only 79 and 62 of them, respectively. Our contact-assisted models also have much better quality than template-based models especially for membrane proteins. The 3D models built from our contact prediction have TMscore>0.5 for 208 of the 398 membrane proteins, while those from homology modeling have TMscore>0.5 for only 10 of them. Further, even if trained mostly by soluble proteins, our deep learning method works very well on membrane proteins. In the recent blind CAMEO benchmark, our fully-automated web server implementing this method successfully folded 6 targets with a new fold and only 0.3L-2.3L effective sequence homologs, including one β protein of 182 residues, one α+β protein of 125 residues, one α protein of 140 residues, one α protein of 217 residues, one α/β of 260 residues and one α protein of 462 residues. Our method also achieved the highest F1 score on free-modeling targets in the latest CASP (Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction), although it was not fully implemented back then. AVAILABILITY: http://raptorx.uchicago.edu/ContactMap/.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.