The most rigorous, externally-validated evidence on AI protein structure prediction comes from the CASP14 community assessment of 97 targets. AlphaFold2 produced the most accurate models for most targets (median S_CASP14 = 2.2 Γ ), and models solved molecular replacement for 89 of 97 targets β 26 without any AMPLE truncation β demonstrating experimental-level practical utility . Notably, the runner-up (updated trRosetta) already beat CASP13 winners β evidence that gains were field-wide, not solely one model. Data and code are openly available for independent verification .
Assessor-identified blind spots, not marketing claims, define the limits: sidechain accuracy remains the hardest unsolved component; the DipDiff geometry metric can penalize otherwise accurate models; target structures may have been refined post-submission; and AF2 mainly addresses single-chain folded proteins, with generality to multi-chain or dynamic systems untested . A critical, largely unstated bias: CASP targets skew toward soluble, crystallizable proteins, so the headline 89/97 MR success rate should not be extrapolated to membrane proteins or intrinsically disordered regions.
Verdict: The CASP14 evidence is strong, reproducible, and low-conflict-of-interest, but its scope is narrower than headline claims suggest. Confidence: moderate-to-high for single-chain folded domains; low for dynamic, multi-chain, and membrane contexts. What would change this verdict: failure of top methods on a future broad CASP target set, or non-reproducibility of the open data/code.
Know what changed, what holds up, and what remains uncertain. Every Friday. No ads.