ArticlePLoS computational biology2026
Using experimental results of protein design to guide biomolecular energy-function development.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- BioTester: an AI-driven automated testing framework for identifying potential quality risks in bioinformatics software.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Accurate protein stability prediction for small domains using mega-scale experiments.bioRxiv : the preprint server for 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational models of macromolecules have many applications in biochemistry, but physical inaccuracies limit their utility. One class of models uses energy functions rooted in classical mechanics. The standard datasets used to train these models are limited in diversity, pointing to a need for new training data. Here, we sought to explore a new paradigm for training an energy function, where the Rosetta energy function was used to design de novo proteins. Experimental results on these designs were then used to identify failure modes of design, which were subsequently used as a "guiding principle" to retrain the energy function. Specifically, we examined a diverse set of de novo protein designs experimentally tested for their ability to stably fold, identifying unstable designs that were predicted to be stable by the Rosetta energy function. Using deep mutational scanning, we identified single amino-acid mutations that rescued the stability of these designs, providing insight into common failure modes of the energy function. We identified one key failure mode, involving steric clashing in protein cores. We identified similar overpacking when using Rosetta to refine high-resolution protein crystal structures, quantified the degree of overpacking, and refit a small set of energy-function parameters to better recapitulate native-like packing. Following fitting, we largely eliminated the failure mode in the refinement task, while retaining performance on other benchmarks, resulting in an updated version of the Rosetta energy function. This work shows how learning from protein designs can guide energy-function development.
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.