ArticleBioinformatics advances2026
Evaluating transformer-based models for structural characterization of orphan proteins.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Transformer-based models (TBMs) are state-of-the-art deep learning architectures that predict protein structural features with high accuracy. Despite methodological differences, they all rely on large datasets structured in families of homologous sequences. However, 5%-30% of eukaryotic proteomes consist of orphan proteins, which are sequences without detectable similarity to known families. Although they may share structural traits with characterized proteins, their lack of homology makes them an ideal dataset for evaluating TBM generalization beyond familiar sequence space. Results: We compared predictions from several widely used TBM architectures on an expert-curated set of orphan proteins from the Meloidogyne genus, comprising some of the most destructive plant-parasitic nematodes. Multiple sequence alignment-based approaches such as AlphaFold2 performed poorly on orphan proteins, as did single-sequence or embedding-based language models ESMFold, OmegaFold, and ProtT5. This limited performance cannot be fully attributed to intrinsic disorder, as confirmed by independent non-TBM disorder predictors. While accurate tertiary structure prediction remains out of reach, secondary structure is more reliably captured: predictors share about 70% of secondary structure elements, regardless of global fold similarity, and these elements are consistently identified by dedicated secondary structure tools. Availability: All data and analysis scripts are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18788931.
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.