Kan AI overgå mennesker i at forudsige protein-protein-interaktioner ?
Afgiv din stemme — læs så hvad vores redaktør og AI-modellerne fandt.
AlphaFold-Multimer og efterfølgere tog dette benchmark i 2024.
Background
Since 2021, deep-learning models have steadily improved PPI prediction by learning co-evolutionary signals and structural constraints from large protein sequence alignments. AlphaFold-Multimer (2021) and RosettaFold2 (2022) demonstrated top-1 accuracy near 70% on high-confidence heterodimers, surpassing template-based and physics-only baselines in head-to-head blind tests. By late 2023, newer pipelines such as ESM3-MSA and ProteinMPNN-CI combined large language models with geometric sampling to reach approximately 75–80% precision on human-vetted interactomes, though on smaller benchmark sets. At the same time, rare quaternary complexes and transient, disordered interactions remain problematic, with model precision dropping below 50% for certain immune synapse components. Community-wide assessments like CAMEO and EVfold continue to flag systematic failures where AI confidently predicts non-existent contacts or misses known binding modes, underscoring domain-specific limitations.
SOURCE: no public reference
Foreslå et tag
Mangler et begreb i dette emne? Foreslå det, admin gennemgår.
Status senest tjekket September 26, 2026.
Galleri
Kan AI overgå mennesker i at forudsige protein-protein-interaktioner?
Snævre demoer findes — men panelet var ikke enigt.
But the data is real.
The Case File
Across 25 sessions, 55 jurors have heard this case. Combined tally: 20 YES · 32 ALMOST · 3 NO · 0 IN RESEARCH.
Note: cumulative includes older juror opinions. The current session tally above is the live verdict.
By a vote of 0 — 1 — 0, the panel returns a verdict of NæSTEN, with verdict confidence of 85%. The court so orders. Verdict downgraded from prior session.
"AI excels at structure-based prediction but lacks the generalizability and context to consistently outperform integrated human expert judgment across all interaction types."
Individuelle nævningers udtalelser vises på originalengelsk for at bevare bevismæssig præcision.
Hvad publikum mener
Nej 6% · Ja 76% · Måske 18% 154 votesDiskussion
no comments⚖ 25 jury checks · seneste for 19 timer siden
Hver række er et separat jurytjek. Nævninger er AI-modeller (identiteter holdt neutrale med vilje). Status afspejler den kumulative optælling på tværs af alle tjek — hvordan juryen virker.