RNA molecules often function through multiple experimentally observed conformational states. A central challenge is to capture ensemble diversity without sacrificing structural fidelity: samples may collapse toward averaged representative structures or drift into unsupported conformational regions. We introduce REFLEX (RNA Ensemble generation calibrated by FLEXibility), a sequence-conditioned generator for RNA backbone-frame ensembles based on a heteroscedastic stochastic bridge on SE(3). During training, experimental B-factors calibrate residue-wise bridge widths, exposing each observed conformer through local perturbation neighborhoods with residue-specific scales while keeping constrained regions sharper. A learned flexibility condition guides the bridge-field network to recover target conformer-specific frames from these calibrated noisy states. At inference, REFLEX uses only the input sequence, requiring no MSA-subsampling heuristics. On a multi-conformer RNA benchmark, REFLEX achieves the best precision-recall trade-off for ensemble coverage across evaluation thresholds, while recovery-stress ablations indicate gains in target-frame recovery under stronger perturbations.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of REFLEX . a : RNA ensemble generation aims to recover accurate conformational alternatives rather than simply increase sample spread. b : Flexibility-calibrated stochastic bridge on SE(3) . The structures on the right are multiple target conformations, and their averaged B -factor profile captures nucleotide-wise flexibility used to calibrate the stochastic bridge. c : Nucleotide-wise stochastic strength, with nucleotides on the horizontal axis and stochasticity strength on the vertical axis; flexible positions receive stronger stochasticity than constrained positions.
Figure 2: Coverage of experimental conformers. a : Top- K AMR (TM-score), the mean of the K highest matching scores for each reference conformer, for K=1,…,5 , evaluated on clusters where every method has at least five samples. b : Best-match RMSD AMR on the test set. Shading and error bars show 95% bootstrap confidence intervals; points in b show per-cluster values.
Figure 3: Qualitative recovery on PDB 8UO6 . Two experimentally resolved conformers are shown against their nearest generated matches from REFLEX , RNAbpFlow , and RhoFold+ subMSA. TM-score and RMSD are reported below each match.
Method
AMR-R
COV-R
AMR-P
COV-P
Diversity (Å)
@ 0.30
@ 0.35
@ 0.40
@ 0.30
@ 0.35
@ 0.40
RNAbpFlow
0.385
0.640
0.422
0.358
0.378
0.558
0.386
0.371
3.178
AF3 subMSA
0.430
0.646
0.542
0.445
0.411
0.563
0.483
0.394
0.786
RhoFold+ subMSA
0.380
0.552
0.470
0.384
0.402
0.522
0.437
0.388
1.237
DynaRNA
0.331
0.436
0.327
0.247
0.257
0.250
0.218
0.204
4.439
REFLEX
0.451
0.742
0.647
0.543
0.419
0.634
0.533
0.450
2.900
Table 1: Ensemble recovery on the RNA benchmark. All methods generate K=20 samples per RNA. AMR-R and AMR-P report reference-to-sample and sample-to-reference best-match TM-scores. COV-R and COV-P use thresholds 0.30 , 0.35 , and 0.40 . Each metric is macro-averaged over its evaluated clusters (Appendix C ); higher AMR and coverage values are better, with the best in bold . Diversity is average pairwise RMSD in Å.
Figure 4: Precision–recall Pareto plot. Each method is evaluated at TM-score thresholds τ∈{0.30,0.35,0.40} . COV-R and COV-P are macro-averaged as in Table 1 ; the gray shaded region denotes the dominated region.
Figure 5: Multi-conformer supervision stability. a : Target-frame recovery error after one-step recovery from perturbed bridge states at t=0.75 . b : SepRet under the same perturbation protocol. Stars and ns denote significant and non-significant paired comparisons with REFLEX . Additional results at t=0.25 and t=0.5 are provided in Appendix D .
Method
Low [0.078,0.363]
Mid [0.365,0.471]
High [0.483,0.843]
Linear Bridge
0.505
0.435
0.340
Uniform Stochastic Bridge
0.540
0.444
0.356
REFLEX
0.531
0.470
0.358
Table 2: Conformer recovery by ground-truth distinctness. Distinctness is average pairwise TM-distance between resolved conformers. The Low/Mid/High bins contain 16/17/17 clusters. Entries are mean per-cluster AMR-R over the evaluated structure sets; higher is better.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Group
Symbol / Name
Value
Time grid
Cutoff ϵt
10−2
Inference / validation steps
60 / 60
Stochastic bridge
Base widths σx / σΩ
1.0 Å / 1.0 rad
Heteroscedastic gain
σi=σ(1+2αi) , with αi=(clip(Bi,0.2,1.6)−0.2)/1.4
Diffusion gx / gR
1.0 Å / 1.0 rad; constant
Rotation schedule
Exponential, ρ=10
Appendix
Table 3: Key hyperparameters of REFLEX .
Figure 6: Additional recovery-stress results at t=0.25 . a : Target-frame recovery error after one-step recovery from perturbed bridge states. b : SepRet under the same perturbation protocol. Stars and ns denote significant and non-significant paired comparisons with REFLEX .
Figure 7: Additional recovery-stress results at t=0.5 . a : Target-frame recovery error after one-step recovery from perturbed bridge states. b : SepRet under the same perturbation protocol. Stars and ns denote significant and non-significant paired comparisons with REFLEX .
Figure 8: Statistical analysis of conformer recovery. Left: best-match TM-score AMR, where higher is better. Right: best-match RMSD AMR, where lower is better. Bars show means with 95% bootstrap confidence intervals; stars denote Holm-corrected significance from one-sided paired Wilcoxon comparisons with REFLEX .
Figure 9: Statistical analysis for precision–recall coverage. Left: COV-R at TM-score thresholds τ∈{0.30,0.35,0.40} . Right: COV-P at the same thresholds. Bars show cluster-level means with 95% bootstrap confidence intervals; stars denote Holm-corrected significance from one-sided paired bootstrap comparisons with REFLEX . Absence of a star indicates that the comparison does not meet the 0.05 significance threshold.
Variant
COV-R
COV-P
Diversity (Å)
@ 0.30
@ 0.35
@ 0.40
@ 0.30
@ 0.35
@ 0.40
Linear Bridge
0.665
0.570
0.449
0.554
0.427
0.383
3.401
Uniform Stochastic Bridge
0.687
0.601
0.434
0.606
0.466
0.404
3.088
w/o flexibility supervision
0.753
0.616
0.452
0.647
0.506
0.410
3.157
w/o per-residue calibration
0.717
0.620
0.436
0.620
0.471
0.401
3.252
REFLEX
0.742
0.647
0.543
0.634
0.533
0.450
2.900
Appendix
Table 4: Matched component ablations. All variants use K=20 samples per RNA. Coverage is macro-averaged across clusters, with the best value in each column in bold . Diversity is average pairwise RMSD in Å. The two “w/o” rows each remove one component from REFLEX .
Metric
Chain-macro result
95% CI
Accuracy within ±2 bins
0.759
[0.691,0.824]
AUROC for the top 25% by the proxy
0.681
[0.630,0.731]
Appendix
Table 5: FlexibilityNet prediction. Metrics assess agreement with the relative B -factor-derived proxy.
Method
Precision
Recall
F1
AF3 subMSA
0.697
0.787
0.729
RNAbpFlow
0.712
0.757
0.725
RhoFold+ subMSA
0.694
0.630
0.647
REFLEX
0.734
0.765
0.741
Appendix
Table 6: DSSR base-pair consistency of TM-score-selected matches. Higher values are better; the best observed value in each column is in bold .
Molecular generation develops computational methods to create chemical structures and conformations for discovery, optimization, and structure elucidation.
Designing RNA molecules that bind to target protein structures requires generating both an RNA conformation and its bound complex geometry, without assuming a predefined binding site. Existing approaches generally model these coupled processes within a unified representation, entangling RNA conformation generation with protein-relative placement. In this work, we introduce RiboBridge, a structure-first framework that separates RNA conformational generation from protein--RNA assembly through cross-frame interaction geometry. RiboBridge first proposes multiple candidate RNA-binding interfaces on the protein surface, generates canonical RNA conformations within a pretrained RNA structural latent space (RiboSphere), and then predicts protein--RNA interaction constraints to bridge the independently defined RNA and protein coordinate frames. The resulting interaction geometry is converted into a geometrically consistent protein-relative pose through rigid placement. We evaluate RiboBridge on a temporally split, sequence-filtered, and redundancy-controlled benchmark of 124 protein--RNA complexes. Under post-hoc interface-correspondence evaluation, where native information is used only after generation to select among already generated predicted-pocket candidates, RiboBridge achieves the highest fNAT and DockQ and the lowest interface and ligand RMSDs among compared methods. Component ablations and stage-wise diagnostics further characterize the contributions of RNA conformational generation, interaction prediction, and rigid placement, identifying the main sources of complex-recovery error.
Zhou Zhang, Hanqun Cao, Minghao Sun +5
State Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology at Nanjing University, School of Computer Science, Nanjing University · The Chinese University of Hong Kong · National University of Singapore
Ribonucleic acid (RNA) functions through conformational changes that are not fully captured by static structures. However, large-scale standardized RNA dynamics data remain limited, and existing approaches typically treat trajectory generation and dynamics understanding as separate objectives. Here, we introduce RNADynBench, a standardized RNA molecular dynamics (MD) benchmark with 2585 quality-controlled 100-ns all-atom trajectories and leakage-controlled splits. Building on RNADynBench, we develop RNADynNet, a unified model for RNA dynamics learning that uses a shared backbone for both trajectory generation and dynamics fingerprint extraction from a single conformer. It combines coordinate denoising, single-frame-to-trajectory alignment, and physical grounding to connect all-atom trajectory generation with dynamics representation learning. Physical grounding improves both generated dynamics and the physical information recoverable from these fingerprints. Across both test sets, including the high-flexibility challenge set, the generated trajectories achieve RMSF correlations of 0.875 and 0.766, while single-conformer predictions show comparable agreement with MD-derived dynamics. RNADynBench and RNADynNet together establish a benchmark and unified modeling framework for generating and understanding RNA dynamics.
Yiming Huang, Lennart Bastian, Hanqun Cao +2
Imperial College London · The Chinese University of Hong Kong · Technical University of Munich
Designing RNA sequences that fold into specific 3D structures is a fundamental challenge in therapeutics. Current RNA inverse folding methods typically condition on 3D backbone coordinates but the generation is limited to 1D discrete sequences. This ignores the continuous side-chain orientations, which are essential for overall structural stability. To address this issue, we explicitly introduce side-chain geometry into the RNA generative process. Unlike co-design frameworks that diffuse across separate raw spaces, we propose Geometric Optimized Latent Diffusion (GOLD), which project sequence and structure into a unified latent manifold. GOLD employs a novel GeoVAE to elegantly integrate discrete RNA sequences with continuous side-chain angles. By mapping these modalities into a single, smooth latent manifold, GOLD naturally facilitates a synergistic co-diffusion process. To enhance structural validity, we further introduce a training-free, gradient-guided sampling mechanism. By decoding the generated sequence probabilities and side-chain geometries into structures during the sampling process, we compute analytical gradients from physical constraints. This dynamic feedback actively guides the generated sequence to a physically stable state. Extensive experiments validate the superiority of GOLD, achieving state-of-the-art performance across sequence recovery, secondary structure validity, and 3D foldability metrics. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/darkflash03/GOLD.
Qi Si, Xuyang Liu, Penglei Wang +6
Shanghai Academy of Artificial Intelligence for Science · School of Biomedical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Community Science Department, Kuaishou +2