Physics-Informed Generative Modeling for De Novo Protein Design Under Thermodynamic and Structural Constraints

Authors

  • Mahmut Jungfer Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA.
  • Hemi McMurray Department of Computer Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.
  • Kenan Birnbaum Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA.

Keywords:

physics-informed generative modeling; de novo protein design; thermodynamic constraints; structural biology; machine learning systems; governance; sustainability; robustness

Abstract

De novo protein design has entered a new phase in which generative machine learning systems propose sequences and structures that are not directly observed in nature. These systems promise advances in therapeutics, biocatalysis, materials, and environmental sensing, but their outputs must satisfy thermodynamic stability, structural compatibility, functional specificity, and manufacturability constraints. This paper examines physics-informed generative modeling as a socio-technical infrastructure rather than a narrow algorithmic pursuit. It argues that thermodynamic and structural constraints should be embedded across data generation, model architecture, training objectives, evaluation pipelines, and deployment governance. The analysis considers trade-offs among all-atom fidelity, computational tractability, equivariance, robustness, interpretability, and equity of access. It also evaluates infrastructure requirements, including high-performance computing, curated structural databases, reproducible evaluation suites, model documentation, and sustainability accounting. Cross-domain comparisons with molecular design, weather modeling, and safety-critical machine learning clarify how failure modes propagate when physical plausibility is treated as an afterthought. The paper concludes that successful de novo protein design requires hybrid architectures that couple generative proposal mechanisms with physics-based validation, uncertainty quantification, and governance mechanisms that make limitations visible to downstream users. Without such integration, generative models may produce aesthetically plausible but thermodynamically fragile or functionally irrelevant designs. With it, physics-informed generative systems can expand the space of viable proteins while maintaining scientific accountability, operational robustness, and public trust.

References

1. Anfinsen, C. B. (1973). Principles that govern the folding of protein chains. Science, 181(4096), 223-230.

2. Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., ... Hassabis, D. (2021). Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature, 596(7873), 583-589.

3. Watson, J. L., Juergens, D., Bennett, N. R., Trippe, B. L., Yim, J., Eisenach, H. E., ... Baker, D. (2023). De novo design of protein structure and function with RFdiffusion. Nature, 620(7976), 1089-1100.

4. Dauparas, J., Anishchenko, I., Bennett, N., Bai, H., Ragotte, R. J., Milles, L. F., ... Baker, D. (2022). Robust deep learning-based protein sequence design using ProteinMPNN. Science, 378(6615), 49-56.

5. Ingraham, J. B., Baranov, M., Costello, Z., Barber, K. W., Wang, W., Ismail, A., ... Grigoryan, G. (2023). Illuminating protein space with a programmable generative model. Nature, 623(7989), 1070-1078.

6. Hsu, C., Verkuil, R., Liu, J., Lin, Z., Hie, B., Sercu, T., Lerer, A., & Rives, A. (2022). Learning inverse folding from millions of predicted structures. Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning, 162, 8946-8970.

7. Noé, F., Olsson, S., Köhler, J., & Wu, H. (2019). Boltzmann generators: Sampling equilibrium states of many-body systems with deep learning. Science, 365(6457), eaaw1147.

8. Köhler, J., Klein, L., & Noé, F. (2020). Equivariant flows: Exact likelihood generative learning for symmetric densities. Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning, 119, 5361-5370.

9. Sanchez-Lengeling, B., & Aspuru-Guzik, A. (2018). Inverse molecular design using machine learning: Generative models for matter engineering. Science, 361(6400), 360-365.

10. Gebauer, N. W. A., Gastegger, M., Hessmann, S. S. P., Müller, K.-R., & Schütt, K. T. (2022). Inverse design of 3d molecular structures with conditional generative neural networks. Nature Communications, 13, 973.

11. Jing, B., Eismann, S., Suriana, P., Townshend, R. J. L., & Dror, R. (2021). Learning from protein structure with geometric vector perceptrons. International Conference on Learning Representations.

12. Satorras, V. G., Hoogeboom, E., & Welling, M. (2021). E(n) equivariant graph neural networks. Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, 139, 9323-9332.

13. Hoogeboom, E., Satorras, V. G., Vignac, C., & Welling, M. (2022). Equivariant diffusion for molecule generation in 3D. Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning, 162, 8867-8887.

14. Trippe, B. L., Yim, J., Tischer, D., Baker, D., Broderick, T., Barzilay, R., & Jaakkola, T. (2023). Diffusion probabilistic modeling of protein backbones in 3D for the motif-scaffolding problem. International Conference on Learning Representations.

15. Lin, Z., Akin, H., Rao, R., Hie, B., Zhu, Z., Lu, W., ... Rives, A. (2023). Evolutionary-scale prediction of atomic-level protein structure with a language model. Science, 379(6637), 1123-1130.

16. Wu, H., Song, Y., Zhang, Z., Zhang, Z., Zhou, H., Ma, W. Y., & Liu, J. (2026). Rationalized All-Atom Protein Design with Unified Multi-Modal Bayesian Flow. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 38, 3019-3050.

17. Abramson, J., Adler, J., Dunger, J., Evans, R., Green, T., Pritzel, A., ... Jumper, J. (2024). Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3. Nature, 630(8016), 493-500.

18. Berman, H. M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T. N., Weissig, H., ... Bourne, P. E. (2000). The Protein Data Bank. Nucleic Acids Research, 28(1), 235-242.

19. UniProt Consortium. (2023). UniProt: The universal protein knowledgebase in 2023. Nucleic Acids Research, 51(D1), D523-D531.

20. Mitchell, M., Wu, S., Zaldivar, A., Barnes, P., Vasserman, L., Hutchinson, B., ... Gebru, T. (2019). Model cards for model reporting. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 220-229.

21. Gebru, T., Morgenstern, J., Vecchione, B., Vaughan, J. W., Wallach, H., Daumé III, H., & Crawford, K. (2021). Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM, 64(12), 86-92.

22. Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019). Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3645-3650.

Downloads

Published

2026-09-12

How to Cite

Mahmut Jungfer, Hemi McMurray, & Kenan Birnbaum. (2026). Physics-Informed Generative Modeling for De Novo Protein Design Under Thermodynamic and Structural Constraints. Bioinformatics Insights and Analytics, 1(2). Retrieved from https://www.bioinfia.org/index.php/home/article/view/233