Self-supervised machine learning methods for protein design improve sampling but not the identification of high-fitness variants

Machine learning (ML) is changing the world of computational protein design, with data-driven methods surpassing biophysical-based methods in experimental success. However, they are most often reported as case studies, lack integration and standardization, and are therefore hard to objectively compare. In this study, we established a streamlined and diverse toolbox for methods that predict amino acid probabilities inside the Rosetta software framework that allows for the side-by-side comparison of these models. Subsequently, existing protein fitness landscapes were used to benchmark novel ML methods in realistic protein design settings. We focused on the traditional problems of protein design: sampling and scoring. A major finding of our study is that ML approaches are better at purging the sampling space from deleterious mutations. Nevertheless, scoring resulting mutations without model fine-tuning showed no clear improvement over scoring with Rosetta. We conclude that ML now complements, rather than replaces, biophysical methods in protein design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science Advances
Published
2025-02-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adr7338
Citations
12
Primary Topic
Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
27.29
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Self-supervised machine learning methods for protein design improve sampling but not the identification of high-fitness variants

Moritz Ertelt, Jens Meiler, Clara T. Schoeder, Rocco Moretti
12 citations
Science Advances
Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications
27.29
article

Self-supervised machine learning methods for protein design improve sampling but not the identification of high-fitness variants

Moritz Ertelt, Jens Meiler, Clara T. Schoeder, Rocco Moretti
article en
12 citations

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) is changing the world of computational protein design, with data-driven methods surpassing biophysical-based methods in experimental success. However, they are most often reported as case studies, lack integration and standardization, and are therefore hard to objectively compare. In this study, we established a streamlined and diverse toolbox for methods that predict amino acid probabilities inside the Rosetta software framework that allows for the side-by-side comparison of these models. Subsequently, existing protein fitness landscapes were used to benchmark novel ML methods in realistic protein design settings. We focused on the traditional problems of protein design: sampling and scoring. A major finding of our study is that ML approaches are better at purging the sampling space from deleterious mutations. Nevertheless, scoring resulting mutations without model fine-tuning showed no clear improvement over scoring with Rosetta. We conclude that ML now complements, rather than replaces, biophysical methods in protein design.

Science AdvancesVol. 11(7)
Vanderbilt University (US), Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada) (CA), Leipzig University (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications
27.29
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.