Ipsae
Claude Code skills for protein design
npx -y skills add adaptyvbio/protein-design-skills --skill ipsaeAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Binder design ranking using ipSAE (interprotein Score from Aligned Errors). Use this skill when: (1) Ranking binder designs for experimental testing, (2) Filtering BindCraft or RFdiffusion outputs, (3) Comparing AF2/AF3/Boltz predictions, (4) Predicting binding success rates, (5) Need better ranking than ipTM or iPAE. For structure prediction, use chai or alphafold. For QC thresholds, use protein-qc.
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
5.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
ipSAE Binder Ranking
Prerequisites
| Requirement | Minimum | Recommended |
|---|---|---|
| Python | 3.8+ | 3.10 |
| NumPy | 1.20+ | Latest |
| RAM | 8GB | 16GB |
Overview
ipSAE (interprotein Score from Aligned Errors) is a scoring function for ranking protein-protein interactions predicted by AlphaFold2, AlphaFold3, and Boltz1. It separates true from false predicted complexes more reliably than ipTM, which dilutes interface confidence across disordered or accessory regions. In a separate binder meta-analysis (Overath et al. 2025), AF3 ipSAE_min gave a 1.4-fold gain in average precision over the ipAE score that RFdiffusion pipelines commonly filter on.
Paper: Dunbrack, "Rēs ipSAE loquuntur: What's wrong with AlphaFold's ipTM score and how to fix it", bioRxiv 2025.02.10.637595
How to run
Installation
git clone https://github.com/DunbrackLab/IPSAE.git
cd IPSAE
pip install numpy
AlphaFold2
python ipsae.py scores_rank_001.json unrelaxed_rank_001.pdb 15 15
AlphaFold3
python ipsae.py fold_model_full_data_0.json fold_model_0.cif 10 10
Boltz1
python ipsae.py pae_model_0.npz model_0.cif 10 10
Key parameters
| Parameter | Description | Recommended |
|---|---|---|
| PAE file | JSON (AF2/AF3) or NPZ (Boltz) | Match predictor |
| Structure file | PDB or CIF structure | Match PAE |
| PAE cutoff | Threshold for contacts | 10-15 |
| Distance cutoff | Max CA-CA distance (A) | 10-15 |
Output format
Two output files are generated:
Chain-pair scores (_chains.csv):
chain_A,chain_B,ipSAE_min,pDockQ,pDockQ2,LIS,n_contacts,interface_dist
A,B,0.72,0.65,0.58,0.45,42,8.5
Residue-level scores (_residues.csv):
chain,resnum,pSAE,pLDDT
A,45,0.85,92.3
A,67,0.78,88.1
Sample output
Successful run
$ python ipsae.py scores_rank_001.json design_0.pdb 10 10
Processing design_0...
Found 2 chains: A, B
Computing ipSAE scores...
Results written to:
design_0_chains.csv
design_0_residues.csv
Summary:
ipSAE_min: 0.72
pDockQ: 0.65
LIS: 0.45
Interface contacts: 42
What good output looks like:
- ipSAE_min > 0.61 (primary filter)
- pDockQ > 0.5 (supporting metric)
- Reasonable number of interface contacts (20-100)
Decision tree
Should I use ipSAE?
│
├─ What are you ranking?
│ ├─ Designed binders → ipSAE ✓
│ ├─ Natural complexes → ipTM is fine
│ └─ Single proteins → Not applicable
│
├─ What predictor did you use?
│ ├─ AlphaFold2 → ipSAE ✓
│ ├─ AlphaFold3 → ipSAE ✓
│ ├─ Boltz1 → ipSAE ✓
│ ├─ Chai → ipSAE (use PAE output)
│ └─ ESMFold → Not applicable (no PAE)
│
└─ Why ipSAE over ipTM?
├─ Different length constructs → ipSAE ✓
├─ Designs with disordered regions → ipSAE ✓
└─ Standard complexes → Either works
Recommended thresholds
| Metric | Standard | Stringent | Use Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| ipSAE_min | > 0.61 | > 0.70 | Primary filter |
| LIS | > 0.35 | > 0.45 | Interface quality |
| pDockQ | > 0.5 | > 0.6 | Supporting |
Batch processing
import subprocess
import os
from pathlib import Path
def score_designs(pae_dir, struct_dir, output_dir):
"""Score all designs in a directory."""
Path(output_dir).mkdir(exist_ok=True)
for pae_file in Path(pae_dir).glob("*_scores*.json"):
name = pae_file.stem.replace("_scores_rank_001", "")
struct_file = Path(struct_dir) / f"{name}.pdb"
if struct_file.exists():
subprocess.run([
"python", "ipsae.py",
str(pae_file),
str(struct_file),
"10", "10"
])
Verify
ls *_chains.csv | wc -l # Should match number of predictions
Troubleshooting
Low scores for good designs: Check PAE/distance cutoffs Missing output: Verify PAE file format matches predictor Inconsistent scores: Use same cutoffs across all designs
Error interpretation
| Error | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
KeyError: 'pae' | Wrong PAE format | Check if AF2/AF3/Boltz format |
FileNotFoundError | Structure not found | Verify file paths |
ValueError: no contacts | No interface detected | Check chain IDs, reduce cutoffs |
Next: Select top designs (ipSAE_min > 0.61) → experimental validation.