ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2026
Predicting and Decoding Allosteric Binding Sites Using Protein Language Models and Structure-Based Machine Learning: An Energy Landscape-Guided Explainable AI Framework.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explainable AI reveals the allosteric blind spot in protein-ligand binding predictions.Cell reports. Physical science · 2026Article
- Decoding the allosteric grammar of protein kinases: A dual-stream framework integrating protein language models and energy landscape frustration analysis.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026Article
- Integrated Framework for Probing Multimodal Protein Foundation Models with Structure-Functional Interpretability Analysis in Detection of Allosteric Binding Sites.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational prediction of allosteric binding sites in protein structures remains a persistent challenge, as these regulatory pockets evade detection by both sequence-based and structure-based algorithms. Both computational and physical origins of this predictive asymmetry remain insufficiently understood. In this study, we systematically examine the determinants of binding site predictability using a dual framework that integrates a fine-tuned protein language model and the structure-based method P2Rank as complementary tools probing a diverse data set of 453 human kinases, together with a physics-based interpretability layer derived from energy landscape frustration analysis. Both predictors exhibit a sharp and reproducible dichotomy on protein kinases, in which orthosteric ATP-binding sites can be identified with high precision, whereas allosteric sites are detected with substantially lower confidence across kinase structures and distinct conformational states. To decode this divergence, we deploy energy landscape-based explainable AI approach that integrates local frustration analysis as an independent physical interpretability layer, mapping predictive behavior to the underlying energetic organization of protein structures. This analysis reveals that predictive success is governed by the local energetic embedding of binding sites within the protein energy landscape. Orthosteric pockets are located in minimally frustrated basins that generate strong evolutionary and structural signatures, whereas allosteric pockets occupy predominantly neutrally frustrated zones associated with conformational plasticity and reduced evolutionary constraint. By integrating the prediction results with energy landscape analysis, our framework converts predictive performance into physically interpretable descriptors of binding site organization in protein kinases. These results establish energy landscape frustration as a potentially important determinant of algorithmic visibility and an interpretability layer providing a feasible strategy for diagnosing the limits of current prediction methods.
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.