Live Stats, next update: Wed 02 Sep
Human PDBs Analysed
Confidently Wrong
Novel + Confidently Wrong
DB size
Visitors
Full statistics →
New PDB Depositions vs. Their Blind AlphaFold Predictions — A Running Test of “Is Folding Solved?”

Release week 2019-10-09

53
structures analysed (40 full · 75.5%)
47.5%
confidently wrong
00.0%
novel sequences
00.0%
novel & wrong
0.972
median TM-score

Zoomed into the red "confidently wrong" box above (pLDDT ≥ 70, TM < 0.5) — the structures AlphaFold got confidently wrong.

The worst offenders ranked, one row per protein (AlphaFold has one model per sequence, so repeat depositions are collapsed — “×N” marks how many structures of that protein exist; the worst is shown). Each row joins what AlphaFold claimed (blue, pLDDT/100) to what the experiment showed (red, TM-score) — the longer the bar, the bigger the miss. Hover a dot to preview its Cα-deviation ribbon; click to open the full entry.

How to read this

Every point is one experimental protein structure. The horizontal axis is AlphaFold's own confidence in its prediction (mean pLDDT, 0–100). The vertical axis is how well that blind prediction actually matches the experiment (TM-score, 0–1; above 0.5 means the same fold, above 0.9 near-identical). Marker size grows with the FRAUD score (confidence-weighted error).

Cutoff: the shaded red box is the "confidently wrong" zone — AlphaFold was confident (mean pLDDT above 70) yet the fold is wrong (TM-score below 0.5). A predictor that had truly solved folding would leave that box empty.

Take-home: 4 of 53 structures (7.5%) are confidently wrong; median TM-score is 0.972.

Read moreShow less — how each metric is calculated

TM-score: how similar the two 3D shapes are overall, 0–1 (a random pair scores ~0.17, an identical fold ~1). Length-normalised so large and small proteins compare fairly. TM = (1/L) Σᵢ 1/(1 + (dᵢ/d₀)²) — dᵢ is the gap between the i-th aligned Cα atoms after best-fit superposition, and d₀ = 1.24(L−15)^⅓ − 1.8 sets the distance scale for length L. Ref: Zhang & Skolnick, Proteins 2004 doi:10.1002/prot.20264; computed with TM-align, doi:10.1093/nar/gki524.

pLDDT: AlphaFold's own confidence in each residue, 0–100 (higher = surer). It is the model predicting its own accuracy before ever seeing the experiment. We plot the per-structure mean. pLDDT = (1/N) Σᵢ pLDDTᵢ, where pLDDTᵢ is the network's confidence output for residue i.

FRAUD score: the headline number — how wrong the prediction was, weighted by how confident AlphaFold was, so a big error it was sure about counts most. FRAUD = (1/N) Σᵢ (pLDDTᵢ/100) · min(Δᵢ,15)/15, where Δᵢ is residue i's Cα distance from the experiment (Å) after superposition, capped at 15 Å. Runs 0 (perfect) to 1.

Novelty: how little AlphaFold had to go on — 100 minus the highest sequence identity between this protein and any structure released before the 2018-04-30 training cutoff. High = genuinely unseen (100% = nothing similar was ever in the training set). novelty = 100 − maxₚ identity(s, p) over pre-cutoff PDB chains p, with identity = 100 × (matching aligned residues)/(alignment length), from an MMseqs2 search.

Homology: the point colour. High novelty (above 70%) flags the sequence as novel (amber) — AlphaFold had no close template; otherwise a pre-cutoff homolog existed (blue) it could have learned the fold from. novel ⇔ novelty > 70%.

What the metrics mean

TM-score (0–1): overall fold match — above 0.5 is the same fold, above 0.9 near-identical. Cα-RMSD (Å): average backbone distance after best-fit superposition — lower is better (under 2 Å is excellent). lDDT (0–1): local accuracy measured without superposition — above 0.8 is good. Each bar counts how many structures fall in that range.

Take-home: median TM-score 0.972 — most predictions match the experimental fold well, with a long tail that do not.

Read moreShow less — how each metric is calculated

TM-score: overall shape match, 0–1 (above 0.5 = same fold, above 0.9 near-identical), length-normalised. TM = (1/L) Σᵢ 1/(1 + (dᵢ/d₀)²) with dᵢ the aligned-Cα gap after superposition and d₀ = 1.24(L−15)^⅓ − 1.8. Ref: Zhang & Skolnick, Proteins 2004 doi:10.1002/prot.20264.

Cα-RMSD: the average straight-line distance between matching backbone Cα atoms once the two structures are best-fit superposed (Å; lower is better, under ~2 Å excellent). RMSD = √( (1/N) Σᵢ |Pᵢ − (R·Qᵢ + t)|² ), with Pᵢ/Qᵢ the experimental/model Cα coordinates and R,t the rotation and translation from Kabsch superposition.

lDDT: local accuracy with no superposition — the fraction of short-range inter-residue distances the model reproduces, so it is not fooled by a single wrongly-placed domain. lDDT = (1/N) Σᵢ ¼ Σ_t 1[ |d_exp − d_model| < t ] over thresholds t ∈ {0.5, 1, 2, 4} Å and all residue pairs within 15 Å.

Trend over time

The blue line is the mean TM-score of the structures by their deposit month; the red bars count how many were confidently wrong. Binning by deposit date (rather than by when we processed them) gives an even timeline, tracking whether AlphaFold's accuracy on newly-deposited structures is holding steady, improving, or slipping as the PDB keeps growing. Months with fewer than 5 structures are omitted so each point is a meaningful average. A dashed trend line is drawn only if the change over time is statistically significant.

Read moreShow less — how each metric is calculated

Mean TM-score: the month's average shape-match score. TM̄ = (1/M) Σ TM over the M structures deposited that month.

Trend line: a monotonic-trend test over the monthly means — Mann-Kendall (Kendall's τ) for significance, with a robust Theil-Sen slope for the line. Rank-based, so it tolerates the skewed TM distribution and noisy low-count months. Shown only when p < 0.05; otherwise a note reports that no significant trend was found.

Confidently wrong: the count that were both confident and wrong. count( mean pLDDT > 70 AND TM < 0.5 ).

Matched structures

PDBUniProtProteinMethodÅDeposited Novelty %pLDDTTMlDDTGDT_TSRMSDFRAUDFlag
6MN6_A Q8NE01 Metal transporter CNNM3 X-ray 3.36 2018-10-01 7.50 85.31 0.47 0.88 3.16 18.19 0.71 wrong
6RSS_A O00308 NEDD4-like E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase WWP NMR 2019-05-22 7.60 74.50 0.46 0.50 1.36 21.87 0.71 wrong
6NYB_A P15056 Serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf EM 4.10 2019-02-11 0.40 83.24 0.75 0.76 16.93 16.40 0.46 ok
6HL6_S Q8WUF5 RelA-associated inhibitor X-ray 1.97 2018-09-10 0.00 95.16 0.40 0.72 27.94 6.27 0.39 wrong
6HL5_S Q96KQ4 Apoptosis-stimulating of p53 protein 1 X-ray 1.98 2018-09-10 17.40 95.76 0.29 0.64 35.71 5.10 0.30 wrong
6U3S_A O75190 DnaJ homolog subfamily B member 6 NMR 2019-08-22 10.00 74.81 0.69 0.67 32.80 9.01 0.26 ok
6U3R_A O75190 DnaJ homolog subfamily B member 6,DnaJ hom NMR 2019-08-22 10.00 74.81 0.69 0.67 32.80 9.01 0.26 ok
6PDJ_A P06239 Tyrosine-protein kinase Lck X-ray 1.81 2019-06-19 0.00 89.38 0.88 0.84 70.07 5.06 0.14 ok
6HQ1_A P07305 Histone H1.0 NMR 2018-09-23 68.75 0.83 0.12 ok
6Q0K_A P15056 Serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf EM 6.80 2019-08-01 0.40 85.19 0.90 0.88 67.98 4.32 0.11 ok
6KZD_A Q16288 NT-3 growth factor receptor X-ray 1.71 2019-09-23 4.90 86.14 0.95 0.91 79.34 4.48 0.08 ok
6KZC_A Q16288 NT-3 growth factor receptor X-ray 2.00 2019-09-23 4.90 86.27 0.95 0.91 80.25 4.48 0.08 ok
6Q0J_A P15056 Serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf EM 4.90 2019-08-01 0.40 85.83 0.92 0.87 81.49 3.35 0.08 ok
6RUP_A Q04837 Single-stranded DNA-binding protein, mitoc X-ray 2.10 2019-05-28 0.00 93.36 0.90 0.93 84.46 1.95 0.08 ok
6Q0T_A P15056 Serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf EM 5.70 2019-08-02 0.40 85.95 0.92 0.87 82.14 3.40 0.08 ok
6PL1_A P04629 High affinity nerve growth factor receptor X-ray 2.03 2019-06-30 0.00 87.50 0.96 0.90 87.41 2.11 0.07 ok
6N3N_A Q9P2K8 eIF-2-alpha kinase GCN2,eIF-2-alpha kinase X-ray 3.01 2018-11-15 55.00 83.72 0.95 0.87 84.61 2.99 0.07 ok
6PP9_A P15056 Serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf X-ray 2.59 2019-07-05 0.40 86.73 0.94 0.90 83.24 1.72 0.07 ok
6N3L_A Q9P2K8 eIF-2-alpha kinase GCN2,eIF-2-alpha kinase X-ray 2.61 2018-11-15 55.00 85.17 0.95 0.93 85.71 1.73 0.06 ok
6N3O_A Q9P2K8 eIF-2-alpha kinase GCN2 X-ray 2.40 2018-11-15 55.00 83.13 0.95 0.89 85.91 2.49 0.06 ok
6IIW_A Q96T88 E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 X-ray 1.70 2018-10-07 79.75 0.93 0.05 ok
6Q0T_C Q02750 Dual specificity mitogen-activated protein EM 5.70 2019-08-02 1.10 92.48 0.97 0.92 90.36 1.19 0.05 ok
6Q0J_C Q02750 Dual specificity mitogen-activated protein EM 4.90 2019-08-01 1.10 92.48 0.97 0.92 90.52 1.18 0.05 ok
6HL5_A Q9NWT6 Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha inhibitor X-ray 1.98 2018-09-10 91.38 0.95 0.05 ok
6PIM_A Q08174 Protocadherin-1 X-ray 3.05 2019-06-26 60.40 90.87 0.97 0.93 93.50 1.10 0.05 ok
6HL6_A Q9NWT6 Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha inhibitor X-ray 1.97 2018-09-10 91.38 0.95 0.04 ok
6NYB_B Q02750 Dual specificity mitogen-activated protein EM 4.10 2019-02-11 1.10 92.76 0.98 0.93 93.60 1.07 0.04 ok
6PP9_B Q02750 Dual specificity mitogen-activated protein X-ray 2.59 2019-07-05 1.10 92.23 0.98 0.94 93.47 1.07 0.04 ok
6GUU_A Q8TDI0 Chromodomain-helicase-DNA-binding protein X-ray 2.95 2018-06-19 62.00 0.94 0.04 ok
6RMG_B Q15465 Sonic hedgehog protein EM 3.40 2019-05-06 0.00 94.56 0.98 0.93 97.33 0.64 0.04 ok
6NW3_A P56817 Beta-secretase 1 X-ray 2.35 2019-02-05 0.00 97.13 0.99 0.95 96.62 0.97 0.03 ok
6U73_A Q9BY76 Angiopoietin-related protein 4 X-ray 2.38 2019-08-31 58.20 94.42 0.98 0.97 95.95 0.96 0.03 ok
6U0A_A Q9BY76 Angiopoietin-related protein 4 X-ray 2.11 2019-08-14 58.20 94.42 0.98 0.96 95.83 0.91 0.03 ok
6JV9_A Q16555 Dihydropyrimidinase-related protein 2 X-ray 2.26 2019-04-16 0.00 96.98 0.99 0.98 98.20 0.80 0.03 ok
6NV7_A P56817 Beta-secretase 1 X-ray 2.13 2019-02-04 0.00 97.12 0.99 0.96 96.83 0.83 0.03 ok
6NV9_A P56817 Beta-secretase 1 X-ray 2.13 2019-02-04 0.00 97.06 0.99 0.96 96.85 0.95 0.03 ok
6RCI_A Q9Y3B8 Oligoribonuclease, mitochondrial X-ray 2.00 2019-04-11 47.80 97.41 0.98 0.97 98.33 0.82 0.03 ok
6JVB_A Q16555 Dihydropyrimidinase-related protein 2 X-ray 2.00 2019-04-16 0.00 97.03 1.00 0.98 98.81 0.56 0.03 ok
6Q0K_X P63104 14-3-3 protein zeta/delta EM 6.80 2019-08-01 0.00 96.82 0.99 0.98 98.14 0.58 0.03 ok
6MOW_A P29373 Cellular retinoic acid-binding protein 2 X-ray 2.35 2018-10-04 96.75 0.97 0.03 ok
6U1U_A Q9BY76 Angiopoietin-related protein 4 X-ray 1.75 2019-08-16 58.20 94.42 0.98 0.97 96.99 0.82 0.03 ok
6RMJ_A P01375 Tumor necrosis factor X-ray 2.65 2019-05-07 0.00 96.33 0.99 0.98 98.99 0.45 0.02 ok
6RCL_A Q9Y3B8 Oligoribonuclease, mitochondrial X-ray 1.97 2019-04-11 48.30 97.41 0.99 0.99 99.17 0.44 0.02 ok
6JPS_A P02794 Ferritin X-ray 3.50 2019-03-27 0.00 98.10 1.00 0.99 99.85 0.34 0.02 ok
6RCN_A Q9Y3B8 Oligoribonuclease, mitochondrial X-ray 2.25 2019-04-11 48.30 97.41 0.99 0.99 99.31 0.41 0.02 ok
6SYP_AAA Q02127 Dihydroorotate dehydrogenase X-ray 1.80 2019-09-30 0.00 97.91 1.00 0.99 99.50 0.34 0.01 ok
6HOV_A O60885 Bromodomain-containing protein 4 X-ray 1.85 2018-09-18 55.31 0.98 0.01 ok
6HR3_A P00918 Carbonic anhydrase 2 X-ray 1.02 2018-09-26 97.38 0.99 0.01 ok
6HQX_A P00918 Carbonic anhydrase 2 X-ray 1.10 2018-09-25 97.38 0.99 0.01 ok
6IBT_A P06280 Alpha-galactosidase A X-ray 2.04 2018-11-30 94.31 1.00 0.00 ok
6IBR_A P06280 Alpha-galactosidase A X-ray 2.02 2018-11-30 94.31 1.00 0.00 ok
6IBM_A P06280 Alpha-galactosidase A X-ray 2.07 2018-11-30 94.31 1.00 0.00 ok
6IBK_A P06280 Alpha-galactosidase A X-ray 1.99 2018-11-30 94.31 1.00 0.00 ok

Click a column header to sort. FRAUD = confidence-weighted error; a structure is flagged confidently wrong when mean pLDDT > 70 yet TM-score < 0.5.