Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39756261›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in structural biology2025

Proteins with alternative folds reveal blind spots in AlphaFold-based protein structure prediction.

Devlina Chakravarty, Myeongsang Lee, Lauren L Porter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in structural biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Evaluation of methods for AlphaFold-based integrative modeling.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Fold-Switching Proteins.Annual review of biophysics · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Bias in the AlphaFold3 prediction of ligand-induced domain motion in enzymes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Devlina ChakravartyNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20894, USA.
Myeongsang LeeNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20894, USA.
Lauren L PorterNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20894, USA; Biochemistry and Biophysics Center, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. Electronic address: porterll@nih.gov.

Funding

Predictions and experimental validation of fold-switching proteinsZIALM202011 · NLM · NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE · PI PORTER, LAUREN · 2020 to 2025
$6.5M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA LM202011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have transformed structural biology, particularly protein structure prediction. Though AI-based methods, such as AlphaFold (AF), often predict single conformations of proteins with high accuracy and confidence, predictions of alternative folds are often inaccurate, low-confidence, or simply not predicted at all. Here, we review three blind spots that alternative conformations reveal about AF-based protein structure prediction. First, proteins that assume conformations distinct from their training-set homologs can be mispredicted. Second, AF overrelies on its training set to predict alternative conformations. Third, degeneracies in pairwise representations can lead to high-confidence predictions inconsistent with experiment. These weaknesses suggest approaches to predict alternative folds more reliably.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyProtein FoldingProteinsArtificial IntelligenceModels, MolecularProtein ConformationProteinsAlternative conformationsDeep learningFold-switching proteinsMachine learningMetamorphic proteinsProtein structure prediction

Identifiers

PMID39756261
PMCPMC11791787

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.