How AlphaFold and related models predict protein-peptide complex structures

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Protein-peptide interactions mediate many biological processes, and access to accurate structural models, through experimental determination or reliable computational prediction, is essential for understanding protein function and designing novel protein-protein interactions. AlphaFold2-Multimer (AF2-Multimer), AlphaFold3 (AF3), and related models such as Boltz-1 and Chai-1 are state-of-the-art protein structure predictors that successfully predict protein-peptide complex structures. Using a dataset of experimentally resolved protein-peptide structures, we analyzed the performance of these four structure prediction models to understand how they work. We found evidence of bias for previously seen structures, suggesting that models may struggle to generalize to novel target proteins or binding sites. We probed how models use the protein and peptide multiple sequence alignments (MSAs), which are often shallow or of poor quality for peptide sequences. We found weak evidence that models use coevolutionary information from paired MSAs and found that both the target and peptide unpaired MSAs contribute to performance. Our work highlights the promise of deep learning for peptide docking and the importance of diverse representation of interface geometries in the training data for optimal prediction performance.
Full text 1,410 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Protein-peptide interactions mediate many biological processes, and access to accurate structural models, through experimental determination or reliable computational prediction, is essential for understanding protein function and designing novel protein-protein interactions. AlphaFold2-Multimer (AF2-Multimer), AlphaFold3 (AF3), and related models such as Boltz-1 and Chai-1 are state-of-the-art protein structure predictors that successfully predict protein-peptide complex structures. Using a dataset of experimentally resolved protein-peptide structures, we analyzed the performance of these four structure prediction models to understand how they work. We found evidence of bias for previously seen structures, suggesting that models may struggle to generalize to novel target proteins or binding sites. We probed how models use the protein and peptide multiple sequence alignments (MSAs), which are often shallow or of poor quality for peptide sequences. We found weak evidence that models use coevolutionary information from paired MSAs and found that both the target and peptide unpaired MSAs contribute to performance. Our work highlights the promise of deep learning for peptide docking and the importance of diverse representation of interface geometries in the training data for optimal prediction performance. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-22T02:00:06.705733+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0