Paper detail

On the Robustness of AlphaFold: A COVID-19 Case Study

Protein folding neural networks (PFNNs) such as AlphaFold predict remarkably accurate structures of proteins compared to other approaches. However, the robustness of such networks has heretofore not been explored. This is particularly relevant given the broad social implications of such technologies and the fact that biologically small perturbations in the protein sequence do not generally lead to drastic changes in the protein structure. In this paper, we demonstrate that AlphaFold does not exhibit such robustness despite its high accuracy. This raises the challenge of detecting and quantifying the extent to which these predicted protein structures can be trusted. To measure the robustness of the predicted structures, we utilize (i) the root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) and (ii) the Global Distance Test (GDT) similarity measure between the predicted structure of the original sequence and the structure of its adversarially perturbed version. We prove that the problem of minimally perturbing protein sequences to fool protein folding neural networks is NP-complete. Based on the well-established BLOSUM62 sequence alignment scoring matrix, we generate adversarial protein sequences and show that the RMSD between the predicted protein structure and the structure of the original sequence are very large when the adversarial changes are bounded by (i) 20 units in the BLOSUM62 distance, and (ii) five residues (out of hundreds or thousands of residues) in the given protein sequence. In our experimental evaluation, we consider 111 COVID-19 proteins in the Universal Protein resource (UniProt), a central resource for protein data managed by the European Bioinformatics Institute, Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, and the US Protein Information Resource. These result in an overall GDT similarity test score average of around 34%, demonstrating a substantial drop in the performance of AlphaFold.

preprint2023arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.