Drug-target affinity (DTA) prediction is widely used to prioritize candidate compounds before costly experimental screening. DTA models are often compared under a single data split, even though deployment may require extrapolation to new chemical series, new protein targets, or both. We ask whether the distribution shift used for evaluation changes which architecture appears best. We curate 718,800 unique drug-protein pairs from the ChEMBL and BindingDB datasets. We compare a Morgan-fingerprint + protein-CNN baseline with 12 controlled architectures that combine four drug representations with three ESM-2 interaction modes. Mean validation RMSE increases from 0.950 and 0.945 under scaffold and fingerprint-cluster OOD to 1.299 and 1.321 under protein-cluster and dual OOD. Model rankings are similar across the two chemical shifts (tau = 0.79), but agreement with scaffold OOD falls under protein OOD (tau = 0.39) and reverses under dual OOD (tau = -0.55). Held-out evaluation, repeated seeds, group-aware bootstrap analysis, and a size-matched control support the same conclusion: architecture selection depends on the form of extrapolation, not only on average error or training-set size. DTA benchmarks should therefore match the chemical and target shifts expected at deployment.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Benchmark design. The same architecture family is evaluated under four generalization regimes to independently analyze absolute error and model-selection stability.
Figure 2: Architecture-rank trajectories under RMSE. Architecture rankings are similar under scaffold and fingerprint OOD but shift substantially under protein and dual OOD. This figure visualizes the paper’s central model-selection result.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 3: Distribution of pKi values in the curated ChEMBL and BindingDB dataset. A reference line at pKi=5 may be included to show the corresponding Ki=10μM location without defining it as a universal activity threshold.
Regime pair
Spearman ρ
Scaffold vs. Fingerprint
0.895
Scaffold vs. Protein
0.448
Scaffold vs. Dual OOD
-0.727
Fingerprint vs. Protein
0.434
Fingerprint vs. Dual OOD
-0.769
Protein vs. Dual OOD
-0.476
Appendix
Table 1: Spearman rank correlations ( ρ ) between architecture rankings across evaluation regimes. Positive values indicate similar architecture orderings and negative values indicate inverted orderings.
Split
Validation RMSE
Held-out test RMSE
Scaffold
1.0355
1.1175
Fingerprint
1.0968
1.1802
Protein
1.2505
1.3359
Dual OOD
1.4700
1.4853
Appendix
Table 2: Morgan-fingerprint + protein-CNN baseline. Values are RMSE under the same split definitions and training protocol as the core matrix.
Model
Protein 511k
Protein 352k
Dual 352k
ECFP+AttnPool
1.2728
1.2804±0.0246
1.3652
GCN+CrossAttn
1.3595
1.2917±0.0315
1.2728
Appendix
Table 3: Training-size ablation for ECFP+AttnPool and GCN+CrossAttn. Protein-matched values are mean ± SD across five independent 352k training subsets. Values are RMSE.
Architecture
Drug encoder
Protein / fusion mode
Batch size
Trainable params
ECFP+MeanPool
ECFP4
MeanPool MLP
2048
1.04M
ChemBERTa+MeanPool
ChemBERTa
MeanPool MLP
2048
0.62M
ECFP+AttnPool
ECFP4
Dot-product AttnPool
128
1.17M
ECFP+CrossAttn
ECFP4
CrossAttn
128
2.09M
ChemBERTa+AttnPool
ChemBERTa
Dot-product AttnPool
128
0.74M
ChemBERTa+CrossAttn
ChemBERTa
CrossAttn
128
1.66M
Appendix
Table 4: Architecture-specific batch sizes and trainable parameter counts. Pretrained ESM-2 and ChemBERTa representations are frozen. Parameter counts refer only to trainable task-specific modules.
Architecture
Scaffold
Fingerprint
Protein
Dual OOD
ECFP + MeanPool
0.9523
0.9511
1.2977
1.3221
ChemBERTa + MeanPool
0.9633
0.9490
1.2858
1.3286
ECFP + AttnPool
0.8815
0.9034
1.2728
1.3652
ECFP + CrossAttn
0.9286
0.9441
1.2749
1.3604
ChemBERTa + AttnPool
0.9362
0.9250
1.2925
1.3112
ChemBERTa + CrossAttn
0.9192
0.9186
1.3091
1.3341
Appendix
Table 5: Validation RMSE across the architecture-by-split matrix. Lower is better. Bold indicates the best model within each regime; the final row gives the column mean across all 12 architectures.
Architecture
Scaffold
Fingerprint
Protein
Dual OOD
ECFP + MeanPool
0.9872
0.9615
1.3823
1.3599
ECFP + AttnPool
0.9234
0.8905
1.3713
1.4948
ECFP + CrossAttn
0.9738
0.9551
1.3703
1.4349
ChemBERTa + MeanPool
0.9969
0.9469
1.3360
1.4143
ChemBERTa + AttnPool
0.9622
0.9307
1.4080
1.3625
ChemBERTa + CrossAttn
0.9594
0.9228
1.3098
1.3883
Appendix
Table 6: Held-out test RMSE across the architecture-by-split matrix. Lower is better. Bold indicates the best model within each regime; the final row gives the column mean across all 12 architectures.
Drug--target affinity prediction is pivotal for accelerating drug discovery, yet existing methods suffer from significant performance degradation in realistic cold-start scenarios (unseen drugs/targets/pairs), primarily driven by overfitting to training instances and information loss from irrelevant target sequences. In this paper, we propose LaPro-DTA, a framework designed to achieve robust and generalizable DTA prediction. To tackle overfitting, we devise a latent dual-view drug representation mechanism. It synergizes an instance-level view to capture fine-grained substructures with stochastic perturbation and a distribution-level view to distill generalized chemical scaffolds via semantic remapping, thereby enforcing the model to learn transferable structural rules rather than memorizing specific samples. To mitigate information loss, we introduce a salient protein feature extraction strategy using pattern-aware top-k pooling, which effectively filters background noise and isolates high-response bioactive regions. Furthermore, a cross-view multi-head attention mechanism fuses these purified features to model comprehensive interactions. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate that LaPro-DTA significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods, achieving an 8% MSE reduction on the Davis dataset in the challenging unseen-drug setting, while offering interpretable insights into binding mechanisms.
Zihan Dun, Liuyi Xu, An-Yang Lu +2
College of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China · School of Artificial Intelligence, Beihang University, Beijing 100000, China · School of Computer Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China
Predicting drug--target binding affinity (DTA) requires models to distinguish subtle chemical and structural determinants underlying molecular recognition. Although recent approaches increasingly incorporate richer drug and protein information, such information may be compressed, homogenized or discretized during representation construction, causing affinity-relevant distinctions to be lost before interaction modelling. We hypothesized that this representation-stage information loss constitutes an upstream bottleneck that cannot be reliably overcome by increasingly complex interaction predictors. To test this hypothesis, we developed ReGeoDTA, a representation-preserving framework that maintains affinity-relevant chemical heterogeneity in molecular representations and continuous geometric relationships in protein structures. Across three benchmark datasets, ReGeoDTA consistently improved affinity prediction, and the proposed representation-preserving strategies retained their benefits across diverse DTA architectures. Controlled representation degradation progressively reduced predictive performance, whereas increasing downstream predictor complexity failed to recover information lost during representation construction. These findings identify representation fidelity as an upstream design principle for accurate and generalizable drug--target affinity prediction, with potential implications for computational compound prioritization.
Yixiao Li, Yining Qian, Yefan Chen +5
College of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China · School of Computer and Communication Engineering, Northeastern University at Qinhuangdao, Qinhuangdao 066004, China · School of Computer Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China +1
Predicting drug-target affinity is fundamental to virtual screening and lead optimization. However, existing deep models often suffer from representation collapse in stringent cold-start regimes, where the scarcity of labels and domain shifts prevent the learning of transferable pharmacophores and binding motifs. In this paper, we propose Co-Diffusion, a novel affinity-aware framework that redefines DTA prediction as a constrained latent denoising process to enhance generalization. Co-Diffusion employs a two-stage paradigm: Stage I establishes an affinity-steered latent manifold by aligning drug and target embeddings under an explicit supervised objective, ensuring that the latent space reflects the intrinsic binding landscape. Stage II introduces modality-specific latent diffusion as a stochastic perturb-and-denoise regularizer, forcing the model to recover consistent affinity semantics from noisy structural representations. This approach effectively mitigates the reconstruction-regression conflict common in generative DTA models. Theoretically, we show that Co-Diffusion maximizes a variational lower bound on the joint likelihood of drug structures, protein sequences, and binding strength. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that Co-Diffusion significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, particularly yielding superior zero-shot generalization on unseen molecular scaffolds and novel protein families-paving a robust path for in silico drug prioritization in unexplored chemical spaces.
Yining Qian, Pengjie Wang, Yixiao Li +4
School of Computer Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China · College of Information Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China · Westlake University, Hangzhou 310000, China +2