Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Sesame: Opening the door to protein pockets

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Sesame is a generative model that converts unbound protein backbones into ligand-ready, holo-like shapes without taking the ligand as input.

desk verdict A promising workshop-scale paper that shows flow matching can turn apo backbones into more holo-like geometries, but the evaluation has enough loose ends—mask handling, missing ApolloDiff comparison, synthetic test data—that the headline claims outrun the evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.05302 v1 pith:YO466PAR submitted 2025-08-21 q-bio.BM cs.AI

Raúl Miñán , Carles Perez-Lopez , Javier Iglesias , Álvaro Ciudad , Alexis Molina This is my paper
classification q-bio.BMcs.AI
keywords apo-to-holoconformationalchangeflowmatchingSE(3)equivariantframesgenerativeproteinmodelmoleculardockingvirtualscreeningcrypticpocketdetectionbackbonegeneration
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Sesame is a generative model that takes an unbound (apo) protein backbone and outputs a bound-like (holo) backbone, designed to be ligand-agnostic. The paper's goal is to show that this learned apo-to-holo transport is accurate enough to replace expensive molecular dynamics simulations for preparing docking targets. On the D3PM-Large set of large motions, Sesame reaches a median Cα-RMSD of 2.87 Å to the experimental holo structure (38% under 2 Å), versus 3.67 Å for the previous baseline; on the small-motion PDBBind-MD and D3PM-Pocket sets, median RMSD drops to 0.18 Å and 0.49 Å, respectively. Downstream, Sesame-generated structures improve cryptic-pocket detection and yield a docking pose closer to the crystal-bound pose than the apo structure in the reported complex. If these results hold, Sesame offers a cheap, scalable way to convert abundant unbound structures into holo-like inputs for virtual screening.

What carries the argument

The central object is the SE(3)-equivariant backbone frame: each residue is encoded as a rigid rotation and translation aligning an ideal backbone geometry to the observed atoms, so the whole protein becomes a set of frames in SE(3). A conditional flow-matching network learns a vector field that transports the apo frame distribution to the holo frame distribution, with geodesic interpolation on SO(3) and linear interpolation on R3. The model is trained with an SE(3)-flow-matching loss, a Frame Aligned Point Error term, and auxiliary backbone and pairwise-distance losses, and generates new conformations by integrating the learned ordinary differential equation. This decomposition is what lets

What would settle it

Retrain or rerun Sesame with the pocket mask removed or replaced by a random residue subset at inference; if the RMSD/ΔRMSD values in Tables 1–3 drop to the apo baseline, the holo-derived mask is carrying the signal. A complementary test runs the pipeline on apo structures whose bound-state pocket is withheld and checks only whether residues near the unseen pocket match the holo geometry.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Sesame frames the apo-to-holo transition as a generative transport problem. Residues are represented as SE(3)-equivariant frames—a rigid rotation and translation per backbone residue—and a conditional flow-matching network interpolates from the apo frame set to the holo frame set, using geodesic paths on SO(3) and straight lines in R3. On the D3PM-Large benchmark, the model reports a median Cα-RMSD to the holo structure of 2.87 Å and a median ΔRMSD of 2.15 Å, with 38% of generated structures under 2 Å, outperforming the SBAlign baseline. On the newly built PDBBind-MD set for small pocket motions, median RMSD is 0.18 Å (82% under 0.2 Å), and on the D3PM-Pocket set it is 0.49 Å, again ahead of

Load-bearing premise

The paper's ligand-agnostic claim rests on the assumption that the holo-derived pocket mask—which residues lie within 8 Å of the ligand in the bound structure—is not an input at inference; if it is, the reported gains could reflect knowledge of the binding site rather than a pure unbound-to-bound transformation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Apo-only targets can be flipped into holo-like starting structures for docking, so virtual screening no longer needs to wait for an experimentally solved ligand-bound complex.
  • Sesame's runtime is a fraction of an MD protocol, making it practical to pre-process large libraries of protein targets before screening.
  • The reported gains on D3PM-Large, PDBBind-MD, and D3PM-Pocket imply the method works across motion scales, not just on large hinge-like movements.
  • Generated backbones improve cryptic-pocket detection, which could make allosteric and transient sites targetable from ordinary unbound structures.
  • Because only backbones are generated, downstream side-chain reconstruction remains a separate step; the paper's results suggest that better side-chain modeling would close most of the remaining gap to holo.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same flow-matching transport could be trained on other paired conformational transitions, such as allosteric state changes or protein-protein binding, where one state is easy to obtain and the other is scarce.
  • A single model trained on both large and small motions might close the cross-inference gap the paper observes; the authors' planned expansion of MD-generated data is the natural test.
  • Because only backbones are generated, the docking evaluation depends on a single side-chain reconstruction; evaluating over multiple reconstruction seeds would show how much of the remaining RMSD is side-chain error rather than backbone error.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Sesame, a flow-matching generative model that operates on SE(3)-equivariant backbone frames and is trained to map apo protein conformations to holo-like conformations. The method is evaluated on three datasets: D3PM-Large (large backbone motions), PDBBind-MD (a synthetic dataset of MD-collapsed pockets), and D3PM-Pocket (small pocket motions). Sesame is compared to SBAlign and EGNN, with metrics including Cα RMSD to the holo structure, ΔRMSD, and threshold success rates. Additional experiments assess Sesame-generated structures with PocketMiner for cryptic-pocket detection and with Glide docking on a small set of complexes. The paper claims that Sesame outperforms existing baselines on large and small conformational changes and that its generated conformations are more holo-like and more useful for docking than the original apo structures.

Significance. If the claims are correct, Sesame is a practically valuable contribution: it offers a fast, ligand-agnostic generative model for apo-to-holo backbone adaptation, with potential downstream benefits for virtual screening. The paper includes several strengths: evaluation on an external D3PM-Large test set, cross-inference experiments showing generalization limits, a downstream cryptic-pocket detection analysis, and a docking case study. The core methodology (flow matching on SE(3) frames with FAPE and auxiliary losses) is well grounded in prior work. However, the central claim of ligand-agnostic generation depends on an unresolved methodological ambiguity about how the pocket mask is used, and the baseline comparison involves test-set hyperparameter selection. These issues need to be resolved before the performance claims can be fully accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A.3 and Section 3] The pocket-mask handling is load-bearing and ambiguous. Appendix A.3 states: 'we additionally add a mask in the holo structure for pocket residues' and later 'we transfer the holo-defined pocket mask to the apo', but Section 3, which describes the model architecture and losses, never states whether this mask is an input feature to the network or is used only for preprocessing/cropping (e.g., for the 512-residue limit). If the mask is a conditioning input at inference, then Sesame is not ligand-agnostic: it receives holo-derived information about which residues form the binding pocket, information that is unavailable for a real apo target and is not provided to SBAlign. This could directly inflate the reported RMSD and ΔRMSD improvements. Please explicitly specify how the mask is used in the model. If it is only a preprocessing/cropping device, say so unambiguously; if it is a model input
  2. [Appendix B, Tables 9-10] The SBAlign comparison uses test-set hyperparameter tuning. Section 4.2 states that 'inference was performed for the best model hyperparameters', and Appendix B reports results for several values of the diffusion coefficient g on the test sets, with the best-performing value used in Tables 1-3. Selecting hyperparameters based on the test set is a methodological flaw: it reports the upper envelope of SBAlign over the tested g values. This does not explain Sesame's advantage (indeed, it favors SBAlign), but it violates standard evaluation practice and weakens the claim of a fair baseline comparison. Please select g on a validation split or report results across g values without choosing the best based on the test set.
  3. [Section 4.2 and Appendix A.2] The PDBBind-MD test set is generated by the same synthetic MD collapse protocol used to create the training set, including the same minimum RMSD filter (0.5 Å) and the MD heating/equilibration parameters. Table 2 therefore measures performance on apo states that come from the same simulator as the training distribution, which limits the evidence for generalization to real apo structures. The D3PM-Pocket results (Table 3) partially mitigate this concern because they are an external real apo-holo benchmark, but the paper should explicitly acknowledge this limitation and, ideally, include additional real apo-holo test sets beyond D3PM-Pocket. As written, the abstract and conclusion generalize beyond the evidence in Table 2.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix A.3] Typo: 'substracting' should be 'subtracting'.
  2. [Tables 4 and 12] Each table heading lists two PDB codes (e.g., 'PDBs: 4ZZI, 4XKQ' and 'PDBs: 4LVT, 1GJH'), but the text discusses only one complex per table. Please clarify the role of the second PDB or remove it from the heading.
  3. [Equation (15)] The indicator function is written as '1{t<0.25}' in Equation (15) but as 't <0.25' in the text of Appendix F. Use consistent notation, and make clear whether the auxiliary loss is applied only in the last 25% of the time steps.
  4. [Section 2] The paper notes that ApolloDiff is omitted due to lack of weights/code. This is understandable, but the claim of 'outperforms existing baselines' should be scoped precisely to the methods evaluated (SBAlign and EGNN); as written, the reader might infer a comparison with ApolloDiff.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the flow-matching training objective and held-out evaluations are self-contained; the pocket-mask ambiguity is a reporting gap, not a demonstrated circular reduction.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is a supervised flow-matching model that learns a stochastic interpolation between paired apo and holo backbone frames. Equations (1)-(3) and the final loss in Eq. (15) regress velocity predictions against conditional vector fields (x1 - x0 and log_{rt}(r0)/t); these objectives do not insert the evaluation metric (Cα RMSD to holo) as a trainable or fitted quantity. The model is evaluated on held-out splits (D3PM-Large test, D3PM-Pocket entire set, and a temporal test split of PDBBind-MD) that are disjoint from the training chains used to fit the network. The fact that PDBBind-MD was created with the same MD-collapse protocol as the training set is a distributional closeness, not an equation-level equivalence: the test labels are real holo coordinates and the model inputs are the synthetic apo coordinates, so the prediction is not forced by construction. No load-bearing self-citation, imported uniqueness theorem, or renamed empirical pattern appears; the method follows standard published building blocks (FoldFlow, FrameFlow, AlphaFold-style featurization) as independent components. The one genuine concern is Appendix A.3: the text says a holo-defined pocket mask is 'added' and then 'transferred to the apo' and used for cropping, but it never states whether this mask is an input feature of the network. If it were a conditioning input, the 'ligand-agnostic' claim and the RMSD/docking numbers could be inflated by information leakage. However, Section 3 and Appendix F describe the model purely as a function of the apo frames and time t, with no mask in the network input, and the paper does not provide any equation showing the mask entering vθ. Because a circularity finding requires exhibiting the specific reduction rather than speculating about an unspecified implementation detail, this ambiguity is recorded as a clarity/correctness risk and does not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a standard flow-matching framework plus a synthetic dataset whose defining constants (0.5 Å selection filter, 8 Å mask cutoff, short MD protocol) are chosen by hand and built on the assumption that collapsed pockets mimic real apo geometry. The most serious ledger entry is the unclarified pocket mask from the holo ligand, which, if used as a conditioning input, would be a form of data leakage.

free parameters (4)
  • PDBBind-MD minimum RMSD filter = 0.5 Å
    Proteins whose pocket RMSD after MD collapse is below 0.5 Å are discarded (Appendix A.2). This ad hoc cutoff selects for measurable motion and shapes the training distribution.
  • Pocket-residue distance cutoff (mask) = 8 Å
    Residues within 8 Å of the ligand are defined as the pocket; this cutoff determines the mask transferred from holo to apo (Appendix A.3).
  • MD collapse protocol parameters = 550 K; 4 ps equilibration; 5 Å radius; 0.0005-0.001 ps timestep
    The synthetic apo structures are produced by a short high-temperature collapse (Appendix A.2). These constants determine the entire PDBBind-MD dataset and are not validated against real apo structures.
  • SBAlign diffusion coefficient g = 0.01 (PDBBind-MD); 1.0 (D3PM-Large)
    SBAlign is retrained and its g value is selected by test-set performance (Appendix B, Tables 9-10), meaning the reported baseline comparison depends on a value tuned to the test sets.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Flow matching with geodesic interpolants on SO(3) and linear interpolants on R3 transports the empirical apo distribution to the empirical holo distribution
    Invoked in Section 3 and Appendix F; standard result of flow matching / FoldFlow.
  • domain assumption The MD-collapsed structures (PDBBind-MD) are representative of real apo conformations and form a valid training distribution
    The entire PDBBind-MD training set is synthetic (Appendix A.2); the paper does not validate these collapsed pockets against experimentally determined apo structures.
  • domain assumption Backbone-only generation is sufficient as a proxy for holo protein structure; side chains can be reconstructed afterwards
    Sesame predicts only backbone frames (Section 4.4); docking and pocket-detection applications require side chains, yet the side-chain modeling is deferred to a separate reconstruction step (Prime), and the paper acknowledges this limitation.
  • ad hoc to paper The holo pocket mask can be transferred to the apo and used during training without leaking ligand information at inference
    Appendix A.3 constructs the mask from the holo ligand and transfers it to the apo; the paper never states whether the mask is used as an input to the network, so the assumption that no leakage occurs is unverified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Sesame: Opening the door to protein pockets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YO466PAR

@misc{pith2026250905302,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Sesame: Opening the door to protein pockets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YO466PAR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05302}
}
read the original abstract

Molecular docking is a cornerstone of drug discovery, relying on high-resolution ligand-bound structures to achieve accurate predictions. However, obtaining these structures is often costly and time-intensive, limiting their availability. In contrast, ligand-free structures are more accessible but suffer from reduced docking performance due to pocket geometries being less suited for ligand accommodation in apo structures. Traditional methods for artificially inducing these conformations, such as molecular dynamics simulations, are computationally expensive. In this work, we introduce Sesame, a generative model designed to predict this conformational change efficiently. By generating geometries better suited for ligand accommodation at a fraction of the computational cost, Sesame aims to provide a scalable solution for improving virtual screening workflows.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05302 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Precision-Recall (left) and ROC (right) curves for PocketMiner predictions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: Apo (blue), Holo (yellow) and Generated Sample (green). Right: PocketMiner per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: Apo (blue), Holo (yellow) and Generated Sample (green). Right: PocketMiner per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Docking Poses used for RMSD calculations in Tables 4 and 12. Alphabetical ordering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ballard, Joshua Bambrick, Sebastian W

    Josh Abramson, Jonas Adler, Jack Dunger, Richard Evans, Tim Green, Alexander Pritzel, Olaf Ronneberger, Lindsay Willmore, Andrew J. Ballard, Joshua Bambrick, Sebastian W. Bodenstein, David A. Evans, Chia-Chun Hung, Michael O’Neill, David Reiman, Kathryn Tunyasuvunakool, Zachary Wu, Akvilė Žemgulytė, Eirini Arvaniti, Charles Beattie, Ottavia Bertolli, Alex...

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Stochastic interpolants: A unifying framework for flows and diffusions

    Michael S Albergo, Nicholas M Boffi, and Eric Vanden-Eijnden. Stochastic interpolants: A unifying framework for flows and diffusions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08797, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Very fast prediction and rationalization of pKa values for protein-ligand complexes

    Delphine C Bas, David M Rogers, and Jan H Jensen. Very fast prediction and rationalization of pKa values for protein-ligand complexes. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 73 0 (3): 0 765--783, 2008

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Holo-like and druggable protein conformations from enhanced sampling of binding pocket volume and shape

    Andrea Basciu, Giuliano Malloci, Fabio Pietrucci, Alexandre MJJ Bonvin, and Attilio V Vargiu. Holo-like and druggable protein conformations from enhanced sampling of binding pocket volume and shape. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 59 0 (4): 0 1515--1528, 2019

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    A practical guide to large-scale docking

    Brian J Bender, Stefan Gahbauer, Andreas Luttens, Jiankun Lyu, Chase M Webb, Reed M Stein, Elissa A Fink, Trent E Balius, Jens Carlsson, John J Irwin, et al. A practical guide to large-scale docking. Nature Protocols, 16 0 (10): 0 4799--4832, 2021

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    SE(3) -stochastic flow matching for protein backbone generation

    Joey Bose, Tara Akhound-Sadegh, Guillaume Huguet, Kilian FATRAS, Jarrid Rector-Brooks, Cheng-Hao Liu, Andrei Cristian Nica, Maksym Korablyov, Michael M Bronstein, and Alexander Tong. SE(3) -stochastic flow matching for protein backbone generation. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    AmberTools

    David A Case, Hasan Metin Aktulga, Kellon Belfon, David S Cerutti, G Andr \'e s Cisneros, Vin \' cius Wilian D Cruzeiro, Negin Forouzesh, Timothy J Giese, Andreas W G \"o tz, Holger Gohlke, et al. AmberTools . Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 63 0 (20): 0 6183--6191, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Ricky T. Q. Chen and Yaron Lipman. Flow matching on general geometries. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.03660, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Ricky T. Q. Chen, Yulia Rubanova, Jesse Bettencourt, and David K Duvenaud. Neural ordinary differential equations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 31, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    Jaakkola

    Gabriele Corso, Hannes St \"a rk, Bowen Jing, Regina Barzilay, and Tommi S. Jaakkola. DiffDock : Diffusion steps, twists, and turns for molecular docking. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Pymol: An open-source molecular graphics tool

    Warren L DeLano. Pymol: An open-source molecular graphics tool. CCP4 Newsl. Protein Crystallogr, 40 0 (1): 0 82--92, 2002

    2002

  4. [12]

    Are deep learning structural models sufficiently accurate for virtual screening? Application of docking algorithms to AlphaFold2 predicted structures

    Anna M D \' az-Rovira, Helena Mart \' n, Thijs Beuming, Luc \' a D \' az, Victor Guallar, and Soumya S Ray. Are deep learning structural models sufficiently accurate for virtual screening? Application of docking algorithms to AlphaFold2 predicted structures. Journal of Chemica...

    2023

  5. [13]

    R. A. Engh and R. Huber. Structure quality and target parameters, chapter 18.3, pp.\ 474--484. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2012

    2012

  6. [14]

    Ligand-induced conformational changes: improved predictions of ligand binding conformations and affinities

    Thomas M Frimurer, G \"u nther H Peters, Lars F Iversen, Henrik S Andersen, Niels Peter H M ller, and Ole H Olsen. Ligand-induced conformational changes: improved predictions of ligand binding conformations and affinities. Biophysical journal, 84 0 (4): 0 2273--2281, 2003

    2003

  7. [15]

    Computational fragment-based binding site identification by ligand competitive saturation

    Olgun Guvench and Alexander D MacKerell Jr. Computational fragment-based binding site identification by ligand competitive saturation. PLoS computational biology, 5 0 (7): 0 e1000435, 2009

    2009

  8. [16]

    Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring

    Thomas A Halgren, Robert B Murphy, Richard A Friesner, Hege S Beard, Leah L Frye, W Thomas Pollard, and Jay L Banks. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. enrichment factors in database screening. Journal of medicinal chemistry, 47 0 (7): 0 1750--1759, 2004

    2004

  9. [17]

    A nickel abc-transporter of staphylococcus aureus is involved in urinary tract infection

    Aurelia Hiron, Brunella Posteraro, Marie Carri \`e re, Laetitia Remy, C \'e cile Delporte, Marilena La Sorda, Maurizio Sanguinetti, Vincent Juillard, and Elise Borez \'e e-Durant. A nickel abc-transporter of staphylococcus aureus is involved in urinary tract infection. Molecul...

    2010

  10. [18]

    Cryptic pocket formation underlies allosteric modulator selectivity at muscarinic gpcrs

    Scott A Hollingsworth, Brendan Kelly, Celine Valant, Jordan Arthur Michaelis, Olivia Mastromihalis, Geoff Thompson, AJ Venkatakrishnan, Samuel Hertig, Peter J Scammells, Patrick M Sexton, et al. Cryptic pocket formation underlies allosteric modulator selectivity at muscarinic ...

    2019

  11. [19]

    A hierarchical approach to all-atom protein loop prediction

    Matthew P Jacobson, David L Pincus, Chaya S Rapp, Tyler JF Day, Barry Honig, David E Shaw, and Richard A Friesner. A hierarchical approach to all-atom protein loop prediction. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 55 0 (2): 0 351--367, 2004

    2004

  12. [20]

    AlphaFold meets flow matching for generating protein ensembles

    Bowen Jing, Bonnie Berger, and Tommi Jaakkola. AlphaFold meets flow matching for generating protein ensembles. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04845, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold

    John Jumper, Richard Evans, Alexander Pritzel, Tim Green, Michael Figurnov, Olaf Ronneberger, Kathryn Tunyasuvunakool, Russ Bates, Augustin Z \' dek, Anna Potapenko, et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold . Nature, 596 0 (7873): 0 583--589, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    A solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors

    Wolfgang Kabsch. A solution for the best rotation to relate two sets of vectors. Acta Crystallographica Section A: Crystal Physics, Diffraction, Theoretical and General Crystallography, 32 0 (5): 0 922--923, 1976

    1976

  15. [23]

    A survey of the S chr \"o dinger problem and some of its connections with optimal transport

    Christian L \'e onard. A survey of the S chr \"o dinger problem and some of its connections with optimal transport. arXiv preprint arXiv:1308.0215, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  16. [24]

    The VSGB 2.0 model: a next generation energy model for high resolution protein structure modeling

    Jianing Li, Robert Abel, Kai Zhu, Yixiang Cao, Suwen Zhao, and Richard A Friesner. The VSGB 2.0 model: a next generation energy model for high resolution protein structure modeling. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 79 0 (10): 0 2794--2812, 2011

    2011

  17. [25]

    Yaron Lipman, Ricky T. Q. Chen, Heli Ben-Hamu, Maximilian Nickel, and Matt Le. Flow matching for generative modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Forging the basis for developing protein--ligand interaction scoring functions

    Zhihai Liu, Minyi Su, Li Han, Jie Liu, Qifan Yang, Yan Li, and Renxiao Wang. Forging the basis for developing protein--ligand interaction scoring functions. Accounts of Chemical Research, 50 0 (2): 0 302--309, 2017

    2017

  19. [27]

    OPLS4 : Improving force field accuracy on challenging regimes of chemical space

    Chao Lu, Chuanjie Wu, Delaram Ghoreishi, Wei Chen, Lingle Wang, Wolfgang Damm, Gregory A Ross, Markus K Dahlgren, Ellery Russell, Christopher D Von Bargen, et al. OPLS4 : Improving force field accuracy on challenging regimes of chemical space. Journal of chemical theory and co...

    2021

  20. [28]

    ff14SB : improving the accuracy of protein side chain and backbone parameters from ff99SB

    James A Maier, Carmenza Martinez, Koushik Kasavajhala, Lauren Wickstrom, Kevin E Hauser, and Carlos Simmerling. ff14SB : improving the accuracy of protein side chain and backbone parameters from ff99SB . Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 11 0 (8): 0 3696--3713, 2015

    2015

  21. [29]

    Lotthammer, Felipe Oviedo, Juan Lavista Ferres, and Gregory R

    Artur Meller, Michael Ward, Jonathan Borowsky, Meghana Kshirsagar, Jeffrey M. Lotthammer, Felipe Oviedo, Juan Lavista Ferres, and Gregory R. Bowman. Predicting locations of cryptic pockets from single protein structures using the pocketminer graph neural network. Nature Commun...

    2023

  22. [30]

    Molecular docking: a powerful approach for structure-based drug discovery

    Xuan-Yu Meng, Hong-Xing Zhang, Mihaly Mezei, and Meng Cui. Molecular docking: a powerful approach for structure-based drug discovery. Curr. Comput. Aided Drug Des., 7 0 (2): 0 146--157, June 2011

    2011

  23. [31]

    Understanding cryptic pocket formation in protein targets by enhanced sampling simulations

    Vladimiras Oleinikovas, Giorgio Saladino, Benjamin P Cossins, and Francesco L Gervasio. Understanding cryptic pocket formation in protein targets by enhanced sampling simulations. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 138 0 (43): 0 14257--14263, 2016

    2016

  24. [32]

    D3PM : a comprehensive database for protein motions ranging from residue to domain

    Cheng Peng, Xinben Zhang, Zhijian Xu, Zhaoqiang Chen, Yanqing Yang, Tingting Cai, and Weiliang Zhu. D3PM : a comprehensive database for protein motions ranging from residue to domain. BMC Bioinformatics, 23 0 (1): 0 70, 2022

    2022

  25. [33]

    Divide and conquer

    Francesc Saban\' e s Zariquiey, Edgar Jacoby, Ann Vos, Herman WT van Vlijmen, Gary Tresadern, and Jeremy Harvey. Divide and conquer. pocket-opening mixed-solvent simulations in the perspective of docking virtual screening applications for drug discovery. Journal of Chemical In...

    2022

  26. [34]

    Combining self-and cross-docking as benchmark tools: the performance of DockBench in the D3R Grand Challenge 2

    Veronica Salmaso, Mattia Sturlese, Alberto Cuzzolin, and Stefano Moro. Combining self-and cross-docking as benchmark tools: the performance of DockBench in the D3R Grand Challenge 2. Journal of Computer-aided Molecular Design, 32: 0 251--264, 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments

    G Madhavi Sastry, Matvey Adzhigirey, Tyler Day, Ramakrishna Annabhimoju, and Woody Sherman. Protein and ligand preparation: parameters, protocols, and influence on virtual screening enrichments. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des., 27 0 (3): 0 221--234, March 2013

    2013

  28. [36]

    Aligned diffusion schr\"odinger bridges

    Vignesh Ram Somnath, Matteo Pariset, Ya-Ping Hsieh, Maria Rodriguez Martinez, Andreas Krause, and Charlotte Bunne. Aligned diffusion schr\"odinger bridges. In The 39th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Improving and generalizing flow-based generative models with minibatch optimal transport

    Alexander Tong, Kilian Fatras, Nikolay Malkin, Guillaume Huguet, Yanlei Zhang, Jarrid Rector-Brooks, Guy Wolf, and Yoshua Bengio. Improving and generalizing flow-based generative models with minibatch optimal transport. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.00482, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Studying protein-ligand interactions using X -ray crystallography

    Andrew P Turnbull and Paul Emsley. Studying protein-ligand interactions using X -ray crystallography. Methods Mol. Biol., 1008: 0 457--477, 2013

    2013

  31. [39]

    The sirtuin family in health and disease

    Qi-Jun Wu, Tie-Ning Zhang, Huan-Huan Chen, Xue-Fei Yu, Jia-Le Lv, Yu-Yang Liu, Ya-Shu Liu, Gang Zheng, Jun-Qi Zhao, Yi-Fan Wei, et al. The sirtuin family in health and disease. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 7 0 (1): 0 402, 2022

    2022

  32. [40]

    Fast protein backbone generation with SE(3) -flow matching

    Jason Yim, Andrew Campbell, Andrew YK Foong, Michael Gastegger, Jos \'e Jim \'e nez-Luna, Sarah Lewis, Victor Garcia Satorras, Bastiaan S Veeling, Regina Barzilay, Tommi Jaakkola, et al. Fast protein backbone generation with SE(3) -flow matching. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05297, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Jason Yim, Andrew Campbell, Emile Mathieu, Andrew Y. K. Foong, Michael Gastegger, Jose Jimenez-Luna, Sarah Lewis, Victor Garcia Satorras, Bastiaan S. Veeling, Frank Noe, Regina Barzilay, and Tommi Jaakkola. Improved motif-scaffolding with SE (3)-flow matching. Transactions on ...

    2024

  34. [42]

    Bending and binding: Predicting protein flexibility upon ligand interaction using diffusion models

    Xuejin Zhang, Tomas Geffner, Matt McPartlon, Mehmet Akdel, Dylan Abramson, Graham Holt, Alexander Goncearenco, Luca Naef, and Michael Bronstein. Bending and binding: Predicting protein flexibility upon ligand interaction using diffusion models. In NeurIPS 2023 Generative AI an...

    2023

  35. [43]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

  36. [44]

    @esa (Ref

    \@ifxundefined[1] #1\@undefined \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo \@ifnum[1] #1 \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo \@ifx[1] #1 \@firstoftwo \@secondoftwo [2] @ #1 \@temptokena #2 #1 @ \@temptokena \@ifclassloaded agu2001 natbib The agu2001 class already includes natbib coding, so you should ...

  37. [45]

    \@lbibitem[] @bibitem@first@sw\@secondoftwo \@lbibitem[#1]#2 \@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@namedef br@#2 \@nameuse br@#2\@extra@b@citeb \@ifundefined b@#2\@extra@b@citeb @num @parse #2 @tmp #1 NAT@b@open@#2 NAT@b@shut@#2 \@ifnum @merge>\@ne @bibitem@firs...

  38. [46]

    ÿ7O Æ K43yh׮] .] Ĉ 1dȐ ҥN +voӦM`Xdg\2l osuyyy뮻F׮]gϞѻwҥK s vꦛno9+gGQQQ Gaaa4h Zh -Z-[FvSNѩShݺuV2 i /bV.(((**hذa4o?m۶=#cu]#???+9 ]b̙1qxcҥE ŢE MF޽[V?ׯMQ *** JJJ

    @open @close @open @close and [1] URL: #1 \@ifundefined chapter * \@mkboth \@ifxundefined @sectionbib * \@mkboth * \@mkboth\@gobbletwo \@ifclassloaded amsart * \@ifclassloaded amsbook * \@ifxundefined @heading @heading NAT@ctr thebibliography [1] @ \@biblabel @NAT@ctr \@bibset...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.