ArticleBMC bioinformatics2025
Adaptive gradient scaling: integrating Adam and landscape modification for protein structure prediction.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- PepLM-GNN: A graph neural network framework leveraging pre-trained language models for peptide-protein binding prediction.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProtein structure prediction is one of the most important scientific problems, on the one hand, it is one of the NP-hard problems, and on the other hand, it has a wide range of applications including drug discovery and biotechnology development. Since experimental methods for structure determination remain expensive and time-consuming, computational structure prediction offers a scalable and cost-effective alternative and application of machine learning in structural biology has revolutionized protein structure prediction. Despite their success, machine learning methods face fundamental limitations in optimizing complex high-dimensional energy landscapes, which motivates research into new methods to improve the robustness and performance of optimization algorithms.
resultsThis study presents a novel approach to protein structure prediction by integrating the Landscape Modification (LM) method with the Adam optimizer for OpenFold. The main idea is to change the optimization dynamics by introducing a gradient scaling mechanism based on energy landscape transformations. LM dynamically adjusts gradients using a threshold parameter and a transformation function, thereby improving the optimizer's ability to avoid local minima, more efficiently traverse flat or rough landscape regions, and potentially converge faster to global or high-quality local optima. By integrating simulated annealing into the LM approach, we propose LM SA, a variant designed to improve convergence stability while facilitating more efficient exploration of complex landscapes.
conclusionWe compare the performance of standard Adam, LM, and LM SA on different datasets and computational conditions. Performance was evaluated using Loss function values, predicted Local Distance Difference Test (pLDDT), distance-based Root Mean Square Deviation (dRMSD), and Template Modeling (TM) scores. Our results show that LM and LM SA outperform the standard Adam across all metrics, showing faster convergence and better generalization, particularly on proteins not included in the training set. These results demonstrate that integrating landscape-aware gradient scaling into first-order optimizers advances research in computational optimization and improves prediction performance for complex problems such as protein folding.
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.