RosettaCommons / RosettaCommons/foundry
Strategies for retaining the hydrogen-bond donor/acceptor architecture defined in the RFD3 active-site model during LigandMPNN sequence optimization
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 966
- Forks
- 181
- Avg merge
- 4d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
Dear RFD3 team,
Thank you for your excellent work on RFdiffusion3. I have a question regarding enzyme design and the preservation of catalytic hydrogen-bond interactions throughout the design pipeline.
If I define specific hydrogen-bond donor and acceptor atoms between my substrate and catalytic residues in the initial catalytic model, how can I determine whether the generated RFD3 scaffolds actually support and preserve these intended hydrogen-bond interactions?
In addition, after running LigandMPNN, how can I ensure that residues forming these substrate hydrogen bonds are retained and not redesigned away? Is it recommended to fix these residues during sequence design, or is there another preferred strategy?
Thank you for your help.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No files, tests, or entry points are named. Start by reviewing the RFD3 scaffold-generation and LigandMPNN sequence-design entry points to determine how catalytic hydrogen-bond constraints are represented. Done would require a project-supported strategy for checking preservation during scaffold generation and preventing or handling redesign during sequence optimization.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- machine-learning
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100