Live data from Hacker News

Alphafold

github.com

71–80 of 170 posts

Re: Alphafold

#71
post #32

Honest question: since AlphaFold doesn't really _solve_ the protein folding problem (it's NP-complete after all), but only _approximates_ solutions very well, what are the real impacts of this? Isn't a good approximation of a protein enough to cause unexpected problems? How do we know that an approximate structure will perform the same as the correct solution?

AlphaFold is not about solving any kind of NP-complete problem.

Proteins consist of chains of amino acids which spontaneously fold up to form a structure. Understanding how the amino acid chain determines the protein structure is highly challenging, and this is called the "protein folding problem".

People use mathematical models to predict how proteins fold in nature. Many such mathematical models are stated in terms such as "proteins fold into a configuration that minimizes a certain energy function". Even the simplest such models [1] give rise to NP-hard decision problems, which are also known (somewhat confusingly) as "protein folding problems". To make this a bit less confusing, I will call the mathematical decision problems PFPs.

Like all mathematical models, our protein folding models don't correspond exactly to reality. Even if you are somehow able to determine the exact mathematical solution to a mathematical PFP, that _still_ doesn't guarantee that the real protein that you were trying to model behaves like the mathematical solution would indicate. E.g. the protein may fold in such a way that it gets stuck in a local optimum of the energy function you were using.

How do we detect this? We make inferences about how the protein should behave, given the mathematical solution to the Protein Folding Problem, and then we perform experiments, and find out (empirically) that the protein behaves in a manner that is inconsistent with the inferences drawn from the mathematical model. Scientists _do_ do this. And they would have to do it even if they had a fast, exact way to solve NP-complete problems, because the NP-complete problems are still just part of a mathematical model, and need not correspond to reality in any way.

The success of AlphaFold is not measured by how well it solves (or approximates) mathematical PFPs. The success of AlphaFold is measured by making successful predictions about how certain proteins will fold. And this is exactly how it was tested [2]: they threw it at a bunch of problems for which scientists have empirically determined how certain amino acid chains fold, but didn't release the results. And then they compared the solutions predicted by AlphaFold, and found that most of the predictions were consistent with what they knew to be the case.*

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_protein

[2] https://predictioncenter.org/casp14/index.cgi

* That's an understatement. The solutions were really very good, much better than those produced by any other submission to CASP14.

Re: Alphafold

#72

> The AlphaFold parameters are made available for non-commercial use only, under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license. You can find details at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode Does CC BY-NC actually do this? As far as I can tell it only really talks about sharing/reproducing, not using. Or is the only thing prohibiting other comm…

Artbreeder has some interesting prior art here: nVidia forbid commercial use of StyleGAN, but artbreeder disregarded it and happily sold all the breeding you wanted. No one seemed to care.

I suspect that the clause is there to prevent a startup launching on the basis of “see this trained model? Yeah, that’s literally our business model” though, which is a mildly amusing thought, wot wot.

So basically, a few tens of thousands, sure. A few million, big G might have a problem.

Still, the smart move would be to launch the business anyway, and gamble that you can work out a licensing deal.

Re: Alphafold

#73
post #24

I am a structural biologist. This is one of the handful of topics that overlaps with my field here. I'm very excited to play with this, although it might eventually put me out of a job.

Here's where I think we need to be going: You go to a doctor's office, sick. 1) They take a blood sample. 2) They find the malignant bacteria and DNA sequence it. 3) If it's a known strain, they know what antibiotics to use on it. 4) If not, they solve protein folding on the genes. 5) From that, they see which existing antibiotics would kill it. 6) If none will, then given the proteins, they have to derive a new antibiotic.

1) is easy. 2) might not be - there can be a lot of things in a blood sample, and finding only the interesting (bad) things might not be simple. The sequencing part is pretty much solved. 3) would take a bit of work, but I think it's possible now. 4) we're getting there. 5) might have a fair amount in common with 3), but it probably takes some additional work. 6) is... probably non-trivial.

That's just one research agenda. There are others. You may have to move to related work, but I doubt you're going to be out of a job in this lifetime.

Re: Alphafold

#74
post #15

Fantastic, they released the dataset and code to train the model. Science will be able to proceed. edit: not the code to train the model, just the code to run inference. The underlying sequence datasets include PDB strucrures and sequences, and how those map to large collections of sequences with no known structure (no surprise). Each of those datasets represents decades of thousands of scientists work, along with pr…

The process is described in Supplementary, but where do you see the code to train the model? The repository is the inference pipeline.

Re: Alphafold

#75
post #16

Alphafold 2 is very very cool, but we need a little dose of reality. It's still a bit away from really solving protein folding as it was marketed. For example, multi-complex proteins are not well predicted yet and these are really important in many biological processes and drug design: https://occamstypewriter.org/scurry/2020/12/02/no-deepmind-h... A disturbing thing is that the architecture is much less novel than I…

I'm genuinely curious: could the output of Alphafold be fed into a classical folding algorithm (as a starting point), or is the output of Alphafold too far down the wrong path, in these cases?

Re: Alphafold

#76
Also announced today was RoseTTAFold from UW's Baker Lab, which claims nearly the same accuracy at much higher efficiencies. There's a public server and paper in Science.

More info here and here:

https://www.bakerlab.org/index.php/2021/07/15/accurate-prote...

https://techcrunch.com/2021/07/15/researchers-match-deepmind...

Re: Alphafold

#77
post #23
post #16

Alphafold 2 is very very cool, but we need a little dose of reality. It's still a bit away from really solving protein folding as it was marketed. For example, multi-complex proteins are not well predicted yet and these are really important in many biological processes and drug design: https://occamstypewriter.org/scurry/2020/12/02/no-deepmind-h... A disturbing thing is that the architecture is much less novel than I…

> A disturbing thing is that the architecture is much less novel than I originally thought it would be, so this shows perhaps one of the major difficulties was having the resources to try different things on a massive set of multiple alignments. This is something an industrial lab like DeepMind excels at. Whereas universities tend to suck at anything that requires a directed effort of more than a handful of people. Y…

The key difference seems to be using the multiple alignments and assumption about evolutionary conservation? Useful for genes conserved, but less useful for de-novo proteins (like COVID and cancer) I guess?

Re: Alphafold

#78
post #74
post #15

Fantastic, they released the dataset and code to train the model. Science will be able to proceed. edit: not the code to train the model, just the code to run inference. The underlying sequence datasets include PDB strucrures and sequences, and how those map to large collections of sequences with no known structure (no surprise). Each of those datasets represents decades of thousands of scientists work, along with pr…

The process is described in Supplementary, but where do you see the code to train the model? The repository is the inference pipeline.

I misread. The data dump is required for inference.

Re: Alphafold

#79
post #54

So... is it possible to clone this and turn it into a Folding@Home client? How does it do?

Where there isn't an available crystal structure, Alphafold can be used to create initial structures for simulation via folding@home, replacing older homology modeling techniques.

Source: former folding@home researcher.

Re: Alphafold

#80
post #69

I missed an important detail: """an academic team has developed its own protein-prediction tool inspired by AlphaFold 2, which is already gaining popularity with scientists. That system, called RoseTTaFold, performs nearly as well as AlphaFold 2, and is described in a paper in Science paper also published on 15 July""" One of the things I say about CASP has to be updated. It used to be "2 years after Baker wins CASP,…

Very cool! Great to see this competition between academia and industry yielding improvements on all fronts.
Post reply on HN