Papers › Improved motif-scaffolding with SE(3) flow matching

Improved motif-scaffolding with SE(3) flow matching

8 Jan 2024arXiv:2401.04082archive 2025-07-28

Jason Yim, Andrew Campbell, Emile Mathieu, Andrew Y. K. Foong, Michael Gastegger, José Jiménez-Luna, Sarah Lewis, Victor Garcia Satorras, Bastiaan S. Veeling, Frank Noé, Regina Barzilay, Tommi S. Jaakkola

Protein design often begins with the knowledge of a desired function from a motif which motif-scaffolding aims to construct a functional protein around. Recently, generative models have achieved breakthrough success in designing scaffolds for a range of motifs. However, generated scaffolds tend to lack structural diversity, which can hinder success in wet-lab validation. In this work, we extend FrameFlow, an SE(3) flow matching model for protein backbone generation, to perform motif-scaffolding with two complementary approaches. The first is motif amortization, in which FrameFlow is trained with the motif as input using a data augmentation strategy. The second is motif guidance, which performs scaffolding using an estimate of the conditional score from FrameFlow without additional training. On a benchmark of 24 biologically meaningful motifs, we show our method achieves 2.5 times more designable and unique motif-scaffolds compared to state-of-the-art. Code: https://github.com/microsoft/protein-frame-flow

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

9 samples harvested; 7 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 9 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections