Organizations: School of Computer Science, Peking University · BioGeometry · Mila - Québec AI Institute · Université de Montréal · HEC Montréal · CIFAR AI Chair
Understanding the dynamic behavior of biomolecules is fundamental to elucidating biological function and facilitating drug discovery. While Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations provide a rigorous physical basis for studying these dynamics, they remain computationally expensive for long timescales. Conversely, recent deep generative models accelerate conformation generation but are typically either failing to model temporal relationship or built only for monomeric proteins. To bridge this gap, we introduce ATMOS, a novel generative framework based on State Space Models (SSM) designed to generate atom-level MD trajectories for biomolecular systems. ATMOS integrates a Pairformer-based state transition mechanism to capture long-range temporal dependencies, with a diffusion-based module to decode trajectory frames in an autoregressive manner. ATMOS is trained across crystal structures from PDB and conformation trajectory from large-scale MD simulation datasets including mdCATH and MISATO. We demonstrate that ATMOS achieves state-of-the-art performance in generating conformation trajectories for both protein monomers and complex protein-ligand systems. By enabling efficient inference of atomic trajectory of motions, this work establishes a promising foundation for modeling biomolecular dynamics.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of the Proposed Atomic Trajectory Modeling Framework.
Conformation Models
Trajectory Models
Reference MD traj.
AlphaFlow-MD
ESMFlow-MD
MDGen
TEMPO
ConfRover
ATMOS
Predicting flexibility
Pairwise RMSD r↑
0.61
0.46
0.65
0.73
0.69
0.92
0.96
Global RMSF r↑
0.57
0.47
0.67
0.61
0.62
0.90
0.95
Per-target RMSF r↑
0.85
0.80
0.77
0.52
0.81
0.89
0.95
Distributional accuracy
Root mean W2 -dist. ↓
3.40
5.00
3.86
4.98
4.52
2.70
1.89
MD PCA W2 -dist. ↓
2.26
2.16
2.75
2.38
3.04
1.79
1.67
Table 1: Evaluation on mdCATH . The best scores are highlighted in bold and the second-best scores are underlined . r : Pearson correlation; J : Jaccard similarity; W2 : 2-Wasserstein distance.
Figure 2: Case Study on 1s79a00 , a target from the test set of mdCATH. (A) the visualization of ensemble from MD simulation (reference) or ATMOS (sampled). (B) The visualization of snapshot at specific frame index. (C) The RMSF versus the residue index. (D) The moving RMSD to the initial structure (frame 0) along the trajectory frames.
Model
Inference Time (Hour)
Peak Mem (GB)
MD Simulation
> 10
< 1
ConfRover
0.467
22.53
ATMOS
0.174
3.445
ATMOS-Parallel
0.044
6.117
Table 2: Efficiency evaluation on the 1gnla01 protein (139 AA). MD simulation is performed with Amber24 on GPU ( Salomon-Ferrer et al., 2013 ) , employing an integration time step of 4 fs.
Method
per-target RMSF r↑
Root mean W2 -dist ↓
Steric Clashes ↓
t-RMSD Error ↓
Ligand
DenoisingLD ( Wu and Li, 2023 )
0.028
0.791
1.825
34.01
GNNMD ( Siebenmorgen et al., 2024 )
0.135
0.870
81.69
0.672
NeuralMD-SDE ( Liu et al., 2025 )
0.574
0.698
7.667
0.698
VerletMD ( Liu et al., 2025 )
0.456
36.83
14.67
43.78
DynamicBind ( Lu et al., 2024b )
0.678
1.470
7.113
-
Boltz-2 ( Passaro et al., 2025 )
0.613
1.237
0.210
-
Table 3: Evaluation on MISATO . The best scores are highlighted in bold and the second-best scores are underlined . r : Pearson correlation; W2 : 2-Wasserstein distance. Boltz‑2 is trained on the entire MISATO dataset, which may lead to data leakage; we include it as a strong but potentially optimistic baseline.
Metric
ATMOS
w/o bi-level sampling
ODE
Pairwise RMSD r↑
0.92
0.88
0.73
Global RMSF r↑
0.90
0.84
0.64
Per-target RMSF r↑
0.89
0.85
0.63
Root mean W2 -dist. ↓
2.70
3.06
3.89
MD PCA W2 -dist. ↓
1.79
2.09
2.73
Joint PCA W2 -dist. ↓
2.32
2.61
3.28
Table 4: Ablation study on sampling protocol .
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 3: Detailed architecture of our framework. BIF: Bidirectional Information Flow.
Hyperparameter
Value
Number of Pairformer blocks
4
Single representation dimension
384
Pair representation dimension
128
Triangle multiplication hidden dimension
128
Number of triangle attention heads
4
Transition layer expanding factor
4
Appendix
Table 5: Architectural hyperparameters for the modified Pairformer.