De novo platform for epitope-specific antibody design against “zero-prior” targets, i.e. antigen sites with no known antibody–antigen or protein–protein complex structures and limited homology to previously solved interfaces.
The method combines three tightly integrated components: AbsciDiff, an all-atom diffusion model fine-tuned from Boltz-1 to generate epitope-conditioned antibody–antigen complex structures; IgDesign2, a structure-conditioned paired heavy–light CDR sequence design model; and AbsciBind, a modified AF-Unmasked / AlphaFold-Multimer–based scoring protocol using ipTM-derived interface confidence to rank and filter designs.
The platform was evaluated on 10 zero-prior protein targets, with fewer than 100 antibody designs per target advanced to experimental testing; specific binders were successfully identified for 4 targets (COL6A3, AZGP1, CHI3L2, IL36RA).
Experimental validation demonstrated both structural and functional accuracy, including cryo-EM confirmation at near-atomic resolution (DockQ 0.73–0.83) for two targets and AI-guided affinity maturation yielding a functional IL36RA antagonist with ~100 nM potency.
All-atom, zero-shot generative model that designs antibody sequence and structure directly in complex with a target from epitope-conditioned prompts.
One specifies target, epitope, modality and the algorithm produces designs.
They tested 4–24 designs per target, achieving 50% target-level success, producing VHHs and scFvs with pico- to nanomolar affinities (best ≈ 26 pM).
Designed antibodies show therapeutic-grade developability (expression, aggregation, hydrophobicity, polyreactivity, stability) without optimization via wetlab validation.
Human PBMC assays (10 donors) show no detectable immunogenicity for representative de novo nanobodies.
Large-scale benchmarking of structural, energetic, and confidence metrics to distinguish protein binders from non-binders.
Curated 3,766 experimentally tested de novo binders across 15 targets from independent campaigns.
Of these, 436 were confirmed binders, the remainder non-binders.
Each design was re-modelled using AF2 (initial guess + ColabFold), Boltz-1, and AF3.
From these predictions they computed 200+ structural and confidence descriptors.
AF3-derived confidence scores (especially ipSAE_min) were the best single discriminators, although per-target precision still ranged widely (0.1–1.0), underscoring strong target dependence.
Novel inverse folding algorithm for antibodies with experimental validation.
It uses atom-level graph MPNN, structured transformer, novel scoring and AF3 filtering; unlike ProteinMPNN/AbMPNN/AntiFold, which operate residue-level and lack downstream optimization.
Only experimental antibody structures (free antibodies + complexes) of antibodies were used for training.
AntiBMPNN uses a distinct dataset; AbMPNN and AntiFold rely heavily on modeled structures, unlike AntiBMPNN. So it might just be that the moderate gains in residue retrieval are due to a slightly bigger dataset used.
Unlike most models they actually performed experimental validation: ELISA assays on huJ3 (single-points, CDR1, CDR3) and D6 (CDR2), with multiple variants improving binding over wild type.
JAM-2 is a novel method for de novo design of biologics that are then experimentally validated and show strong developability (expression, hydrophobicity, polyspecificity, monomericity). More than 57% of all designs pass all core developability criteria straight from the computer jam-2.
JAM-2 is a generative model, but the details are not revealed.
The most promising candidates (thousands per target in epitope-tiling mode, ~45 per format in target-level mode) are tested for binding by yeast display (epitope mode) or BLI (target mode) ; the entire discovery timeline is ≈ 1 month, with 2–3 days of fully computational design upfront, matching exactly what the paper reports jam-2.
Hit rates: Across 16 completely unseen targets: 39% average hit-rate for VHH-Fcs 18% average hit-rate for mAbs 100% of targets produced at least one binder These are all double-digit success rates from only 45 designs per format jam-2.
VHHs have higher hit rates but generally weaker affinities.
A panel of several hundred antibodies was assessed for: hydrophobicity, self-association (polyspecificity), expression titer, monomericity, thermostability. More than half (57%) met all pass criteria simultaneously, and 80%+ passed individual criteria such as expression or hydrophobicity. These molecules were not optimized, it was the first pass from the model.
New biomolecular generative algorithm for protein/molecular design
It extends AlphaFold3 architecture into a generative “world model” that designs interactions across proteins, nucleic acids, and small molecules using a shared token space and conditional diffusion.
High-throughput in-silico design: It achieves up to 100- to 1000-fold higher computational throughput than diffusion or hallucination baselines (RFDiffusion, BoltzDesign, etc.) across 11 computational benchmark tasks.
Novel protein design framework based on a unified all-atom diffusion model that performs both structure prediction and binder generation.
It is fully open and free.
Training setup resembles recent diffusion architectures (e.g., AlphaFold3, Chai), but its distinguishing feature is broad wet-lab validation across diverse target types.
Experimental scale: generated tens of thousands of nanobody and protein designs for 9 novel targets (no homologous complexes in PDB).
Results: tested 15 designs per target, obtaining nanomolar binders for 6 of 9 targets (≈66% success rate) — a notably strong experimental outcome.
Trained on SAbDab with a time split—6,448 heavy+light complexes + 1,907 single-chain (nanobodies), clustered at 95% ID into 2,436 clusters; val/test are 101 and 60 complexes, plus 27 nanobodies.
A two-stage diffusion (structure→seq+structure) followed by consistency distillation, epitope-aware conditioning, frozen ESM-PPI features, and mixed task sampling (CDR-H3 / heavy CDRs / all CDRs / no seq).
Antigen structure (can warm-start from AlphaFold3) + VH/VL framework sequences; you pick which CDRs (and lengths) to design; model outputs CDR sequences and the full complex.
Runs without an epitope but docking drops (DockQ ~0.246 → 0.069, SR 0.433 → 0.050); AF3 initialization lifts success to 0.627 (≈+0.19 vs baseline).
Novel open nanobody design method with experimental validation.
On the surface it might appear like a lot of methods stitched together. The magic sauce appears to be in the joint, gradient-based co-optimization: AF-Multimer and IgLM gradients are merged through a 3-phase schedule (logits → softmax → semi-greedy), with CDR-masking/framework bias and custom losses that force CDR-mediated, loop-like interfaces; then AbMPNN edits only non-contact CDR residues, and designs are filtered independently with AF3 + PyRosetta.
All this is actually not a ‘trained’ model but rather a filtering pipeline that WAS NOT trained (using previous methods, gradients, weights etc.) Just validated experimentally.
Experimental benchmark was ran on four targets: PD-L1, IL-3, IL-20, and BHRF1.
Authors measured how different their designs weren’t just ‘regurgitations’ of known abs. CDR identities were computed against SAbDab and OAS (via MMseqs); many designs show <50% CDR identity to any public sequence.