henhaobio
Sign in

bioRxivGeneticsPreprint

TranceptEVE: Combining Family-specific and Family-agnostic Models of Protein Sequences for Improved Fitness Prediction

Pascal NotiniD, Lood van NiekerkiD, Aaron W. KollaschiD, Daniel RitteriD, Yarin GaliD, Debora S. MarksiD

PDFDOI

Abstract

Modeling the fitness landscape of protein sequences has historically relied on training models on family-specific sets of homologous sequences called Multiple Sequence Alignments. Many proteins are however difficult to align or have shallow alignments which limits the potential scope of alignment-based methods. Not subject to these limitations, large protein language models trained on non-aligned sequences across protein families have achieved increasingly high predictive performance - but have not yet fully bridged the gap with their alignment-based counterparts. In this work, we introduce TranceptEVE - a hybrid method between family-specific and family-agnostic models that seeks to build on the relative strengths from each approach. Our method gracefully adapts to the depth of the alignment, fully relying on its autoregressive transformer when dealing with shallow alignments and leaning more heavily on the family-specific models for proteins with deeper alignments. Besides its broader application scope, it achieves state-of-the-art performance for mutation effects prediction, both in terms of correlation with experimental assays and with clinical annotations from ClinVar.

Abstract summary

Claude Opus 5.5 · xhigh effort · 18 Oct 2026 · from the abstract · CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Blending an alignment-based family model with an autoregressive protein language model, weighted by how deep the alignment is, reportedly improves mutation-effect prediction against experimental assays and ClinVar.

Fitness models built on multiple sequence alignments need many homologues, which proteins that are hard to align or have shallow alignments simply do not have, while protein language models trained across families apply anywhere but, as the authors describe the field, had not matched alignment-based predictors. TranceptEVE mixes the two in proportion to alignment depth, so coverage comes from the language model without losing the accuracy available when alignments are deep.

Key results

  1. ClaimedThe hybrid shifts its weight according to how much homology data exists: with shallow alignments the prediction rests on the autoregressive transformer, with deeper alignments on the family-specific model.

    Described as the method's design; the abstract gives no depth thresholds, no weighting scheme details and no ablation separating the two components. · Abstract

  2. SuggestedMutation effect predictions are reported to improve on existing methods, both against measured assay data and against clinical variant labels.

    Assessed as correlation with experimental assays and with clinical annotations from ClinVar; no correlation values, benchmark sizes or named baselines appear in the abstract. · Abstract

  3. ClaimedThe approach is meant to apply to proteins that alignment-based methods cannot serve, because it never depends on having a deep alignment.

    Stated as a broader application scope than alignment-based predictors; the abstract reports no count of such proteins and no separate performance figure for the shallow-alignment regime. · Abstract

Methods, data and reproducibility

TranceptEVE combines a family-specific model built on a multiple sequence alignment with a family-agnostic autoregressive transformer over protein sequences, weighting the two by the depth of the available alignment. It is evaluated on mutation effect prediction, scored by correlation with experimental assays and by agreement with ClinVar clinical annotations.

  • Multiple sequence alignments of homologous sequences used by the family-specific component
  • Experimental mutational assays used to score predicted mutation effects
  • Clinical variant annotations from ClinVar
Methods & tools
TranceptEVE, autoregressive protein language model, multiple sequence alignments, ClinVar
Limitations (2)
  • The abstract reports no numbers: no correlation coefficients, no benchmark names or sizes, and no list of the methods compared against, so the size of the reported improvement cannot be judged. · noted in this summary
  • Both evaluations are proxies — assay measurements for fitness and ClinVar labels for pathogenicity — and the abstract describes no prospective experimental test of variants the model prioritises. · noted in this summary

Read this if you predict variant effects for proteins with shallow or unreliable alignments and want a scheme that leans on a protein language model as homology data thins out.

Citations
57

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISWells '25Jain '25Gordon '24Vithayapale '26Rao '21Sgarbossa '23
64% semantic matchBioinformatics
Jude Wells, Alex Hawkins‐Hooker, Micha Livne+8 more·bioRxiv·Dec 21, 2025· 2 citations