ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Comprehensive evaluation of AlphaFold/OpenFold prediction of experimentally unresolved proteins through novel metrics.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predicting accurate protein structures is essential for understanding molecular mechanisms, interpreting the impact of sequence variation, and supporting translational applications ranging from drug discovery to clinical genomics. Recent advances in deep-learning-based predictors such as AlphaFold2, OpenFold, and AlphaFold3 have transformed structural biology, enabling routine in silico modeling even for challenging or previously uncharacterized proteins. However, systematic benchmarking of these tools-especially for novel targets and single amino acid variants-remains limited. Conventional global metrics often fail to capture biologically meaningful discrepancies. By evaluating multiple implementations of AlphaFold2 and OpenFold, together with ColabFold and the AlphaFold3 server, across 10 different proteins and 222 single amino acid protein variants encompassing a wide range of sizes, structures, and functions, we show that although widely used global indicators-like mean pLDDT, pTM-score, and RMSD-frequently suggest comparable performance, substantial local-level differences remain elusive. To address this gap, we introduce a comparative framework leveraging Bland-Altman agreement analysis, to evaluate per-residue Cα-confidence differences and Per-Residue profiles (PRPs), complemented by Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP). This approach reveals marked localized divergences, particularly within flexible or intrinsically disordered regions, where both predictor choice and single-residue substitutions trigger the largest conformational shifts. We further demonstrate that using reduced homology databases has minimal impact on predicted structural quality, offering computationally efficient alternatives. Collectively, our findings underscore the importance of integrating global and residue-specific evaluations to more accurately assess robustness, agreement, and practical usability across contemporary protein structure 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.