ReviewAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2026
AI-Physics-Experiment Trinity for Integrated Protein Dynamics Modeling.
Review in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Proteins exist as conformational ensembles, with dynamic transitions governing biological processes. Deciphering these dynamics demands integrating experimental data, physics-based simulations, and artificial intelligence (AI)-each with distinct strengths and limitations. Experiments deliver direct structural and dynamic benchmarks but are often constrained by insufficient spatiotemporal resolution or difficulties with providing information on transiently and weakly populated states. Physics-based methods may generate atomic-scale trajectories via force fields yet face sampling bottlenecks, force field sensitivity, and the curse of dimensionality. AI, particularly deep learning and generative modeling approaches, facilitates the efficient prediction of protein structures and conformational ensembles, as well as dimensionality reduction, yet is hindered by limited interpretability and transferability, and a scarcity of high-quality ground-truth data for training and benchmarking models of dynamics. This review outlines core principles of standalone approaches and highlights integrative strategies: experimental constraints guide physics-driven refinement; AI enhances experimental processing and ensemble generation; physics imparts plausibility to AI, while AI accelerates simulation sampling and force field optimization. We elaborate on this synergy, emphasizing physics-based modeling's glue-like role in reconciling heterogeneous datasets. Finally, we summarize persistent challenges and discuss future directions for integrated modeling of protein dynamics.
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.