undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdm3194y ago0 comments

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?

0 comments

timr4y ago

Dunno yet. MSAs were always a key input to Rosetta (previous best method). How they were used was very different.

Fundamentally, everything in this space (= non-physical methods) is about inferring structure from things that are closely related. And you can't solve the problem at all for non-trivial proteins using physics, so here we are.

feanaro4y ago

> And you can't solve the problem at all for non-trivial proteins using physics, so here we are.

I'd appreciate if you could expand a bit on what you meant here, sounded interesting.

dm319OP4y ago

I guess poster is referring to purely using physics to work out the structure - i.e. no more knowledge than how atoms/molecules move and the sequence. At the moment knowledge is gleaned from evolution by virtue of evolutionary conservancy.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse