Earlier quoted context omitted.
> very had to predict what binds to what, which of course is a multi-billion-dollar industry. Do you need to predict when AP-MS is so cheap? Mapping interaction interfaces is challenging and is where there is attention. I don’t think we’re going to get complexes as a commercial focus outside of receptors with known quaternary structure. The first issue, as you allude to, is the absence of training data, which itself…
> Do you need to predict when AP-MS is so cheap? Yes because a core reason fro this technology is evaluation of de-novo designs (small peptide binders; scFvs; sdAbs)
You are not understanding the distinction. OP was speaking about macromolecular complexes, which are explicitly not what the current round of tools are good at. This is not the same as peptides, small molecules or antibody binding.