henhaobio
Sign in

bioRxivBioinformaticsPreprint

Res ipSAE loquuntur: What's wrong with AlphaFold's ipTM score and how to fix

Roland L. DunbrackiD

PDFDOICode

Abstract

AlphaFolds ipTM metric is used to predict the accuracy of structural predictions of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) and the probability that two proteins interact. Many AF2/AF3 users have experienced the phenomenon that if they trim full-length sequence constructs (e.g. from UniProt) to the interacting domains (or domain+peptide), their ipTM scores change, even though the structure prediction of the interaction is unchanged. The reason this happens is due to the mathematical formulation of ipTM in AF2/AF3, which scores the interactions of whole chains. When one chain is a single ordered domain but the other contains lots of disorder or irrelevant domains, ipTM is higher in the presence of those residues than it is when they are trimmed. If both chains in a PPI complex contain large amounts of disorder or accessory domains that do not form the primary domain-domain or domain/peptide interaction, the ipTM score can be significantly lower in the presence of those regions than when they are trimmed. The score then does not accurately represent the accuracy of the structure prediction nor whether the two proteins actually interact. We have solved this problem by: 1) including only residue pairs in the ipTM metric that have good predicted aligned error (PAE) scores; 2) by adjusting the d0 parameter (a function of the length of the query sequences) in the TM score equation to include only the number of residues with good interchain PAEs to the aligned residue; and 3) using the PAE value itself and not the probability distributions over the aligned error to calculate the pairwise residue-residue pTM values that go into the ipTM calculation. The first two are crucial in calculating high ipTMs for domain-domain and domain-peptide interactions even in the presence of many hundreds of residues in disordered regions and/or accessory domains. The third allows us to require only the common output json files of AF2 and AF3 (including the server output) without having to change the AlphaFold code and without affecting the accuracy. It also works on npz file output from Boltz. We show in a benchmark that the new score, called ipSAE (interaction prediction Score from Aligned Errors), is able to separate true from false complexes more efficiently than AlphaFold2s ipTM score. The resulting program is freely available at https://github.com/dunbracklab/IPSAE.

Abstract summary

Claude Opus 5.5 · xhigh effort · 2 Nov 2026 · from the abstract · CC BY-ND 4.0

The interaction prediction Score from Aligned Errors (ipSAE) reformulates AlphaFold's interface predicted template modeling (ipTM) metric using filtered interchain predicted aligned errors, improving separation of true and false protein complexes.

In AlphaFold2 (AF2) and AlphaFold3 (AF3), the interface predicted template modeling (ipTM) score evaluates whole chains, causing disordered regions or non-interacting accessory domains to alter scores compared with trimmed constructs even when the predicted interface is unchanged. The interaction prediction Score from Aligned Errors (ipSAE) restricts scoring and length scaling to residue pairs with good interchain predicted aligned error (PAE) values using standard AF2, AF3, or Boltz outputs.

Key results

  1. ClaimedRestricting the ipTM calculation and its length-dependent d0 parameter to residue pairs with favorable interchain predicted aligned error (PAE) scores preserves high scores for domain-domain and domain-peptide interactions despite hundreds of disordered or accessory residues.

    Mathematical reformulation filtering residue pairs by PAE and adjusting d0 to count only residues with good interchain PAEs to the aligned residue. · Abstract

  2. ClaimedComputing pairwise residue-residue pTM values directly from point PAE values rather than aligned-error probability distributions allows ipSAE to run on standard AF2/AF3 JSON outputs and Boltz NPZ outputs without modifying AlphaFold code or losing accuracy.

    Evaluates standard JSON output files from AF2 and AF3 (including server outputs) and NPZ files from Boltz. · Abstract

  3. ClaimedOn a benchmark dataset, ipSAE distinguishes true protein-protein complexes from false complexes more effectively than AlphaFold2's native ipTM score.

    Benchmark comparison of ipSAE against AF2 ipTM; specific benchmark dataset composition and classification metrics are not reported in the abstract. · Abstract

Methods, data and reproducibility

AlphaFold's ipTM equation was modified into ipSAE by filtering for residue pairs with good interchain PAE scores, scaling the TM-score d0 parameter using only residues with good interchain PAEs to the aligned residue, and computing pairwise pTM values directly from PAE values in AF2/AF3 JSON or Boltz NPZ outputs. The score was benchmarked against AF2's ipTM on true versus false protein complexes.

  • Benchmark dataset of true and false protein-protein interaction complexes
Methods & tools
ipSAE, AlphaFold2, AlphaFold3, Boltz
Reproducibility gaps
Benchmark dataset accessions and exact PAE threshold values are not specified in the abstract.
Limitations (1)
  • Abstract only; benchmark dataset size, PAE cutoff thresholds, and quantitative classification metrics (such as AUROC or precision-recall) are not reported. · noted in this summary

Read this if you use AlphaFold2, AlphaFold3, or Boltz to screen protein-protein or domain-peptide interactions and want an interface confidence score unaffected by flanking disorder or accessory domains.

Citations
77

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
THISDunbrack '26Goodwin '25Chojnowski '25Badonyi '26Ge '23Bryant '22
72% semantic matchBioinformatics
Roland Dunbrack·bioRxiv·Nov 3, 2026