ArticleActa pharmacologica Sinica2026
TINA: a geometry-aware post-hoc scoring framework for protein-protein interaction.
Article in Acta pharmacologica Sinica, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate identification of the most native-like conformation remains a critical bottleneck in protein complex structure prediction, particularly when multiple globally plausible candidate models are generated by deep learning methods such as AlphaFold3 (AF3). While AF3 provides internal confidence metrics such as ipTM and pLDDT, these signals often lack sufficient sensitivity to distinguish subtle but structurally meaningful differences in local interface geometry. Here, we present TINA, a geometry-aware post-hoc scoring framework designed for fine-grained ranking and selection among high-quality protein complex candidates. TINA constructs atom-level interface graphs and explicitly models two-body, three-body, and four-body geometric interactions through a many-body tensor modeling strategy, enabling a more comprehensive characterization of local contact patterns, angular arrangements, and torsional constraints. The model is initially trained using a joint ranking and regression objective on a large decoy set generated by ZDOCK, with additional task-specific fine-tuning for protein-peptide complexes, and is evaluated exclusively on AF3-generated candidate pools across four independent benchmarks covering general protein-protein, antibody-antigen, protein-peptide, and antibody-peptide complexes. TINA consistently achieves superior or competitive performance in terms of top-1 success rate, enrichment factor, and top-1 DockQ quality. Notably, its benefit is most pronounced in low-confidence and antibody-related scenarios, where AF3 internal ranking signals are less effective in discriminating among candidate conformations. Representative case studies demonstrate that TINA successfully identifies near-native conformations that are present in the AF3 decoy pool but overlooked by ipTM. Ablation experiments further confirm the critical contributions of atom-level graphs, many-body geometric modules, and the joint loss design. Overall, TINA demonstrates that independent, interface-focused post-hoc scoring remains a valuable complement to AF3, particularly for challenging complexes where local geometric discrimination is critical for accurate model selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42855451What 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.