Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Informed protein–ligand docking via geodesic guidance in translational, rotational and torsional spaces

A preprint version of the article is available at arXiv.

Abstract

Molecular docking plays a crucial role in structure-based drug discovery, enabling the prediction of how small molecules interact with protein targets. Traditional docking methods rely on scoring functions and search heuristics, whereas recent generative approaches, such as DiffDock, leverage deep learning for pose prediction. However, blind-diffusion-based docking often struggles with binding site localization and pose accuracy, particularly in complex protein–ligand systems. This work introduces GeoDirDock (GDD), a guided diffusion approach to molecular docking that enhances the accuracy and physical plausibility of ligand docking predictions. GDD guides the denoising process of a diffusion model along geodesic paths within multiple spaces representing translational, rotational and torsional degrees of freedom. Our method leverages expert knowledge to direct the generative modelling process, specifically targeting desired protein–ligand interaction regions. We demonstrate that GDD outperforms existing blind docking methods in terms of root mean squared distance accuracy and physicochemical pose realism. Our results indicate that incorporating domain expertise into the diffusion process leads to more biologically relevant docking predictions. Additionally, we explore the potential of GDD as a template-based modelling tool for lead optimization in drug discovery through angle transfer in maximum common substructure docking, showcasing its capability to accurately predict ligand orientations for chemically similar compounds. Future applications in real-world drug discovery campaigns will naturally continue to refine and extend the utility of prior-informed diffusion docking methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: RMSD distributions and cumulative success rates of docking methods for Complex 6QR3.
Fig. 2: RMSD and torsion-angle error distributions for top-1 BACE08 poses.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets used for this work are available as follows: PDBBind (http://pdbbind.org.cn/), PoseBusters (https://github.com/maabuu/posebusters), DockGen (https://github.com/gcorso/DiffDock) and D3R Grand Challenge 4 (www.drugdesigndata.org).

Code availability

All source code as well as instructions on how to run the code are available via GitHub at https://github.com/NBDsoftware/GDD and via Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15755564 (ref. 21).

References

  1. Meng, X.-Y., Zhang, H.-X., Mezei, M. & Cui, M. Molecular docking: a powerful approach for structure-based drug discovery. Curr. Comput. Aided Drug Des. 7, 146–157 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Friesner, R. A. et al. Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy. J. Med. Chem. 47, 1739–1749 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Trott, O. & Olson, A. J. AutoDock Vina: improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. J. Comput. Chem. 31, 455–461 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ruiz-Carmona, S. et al. rDock: a fast, versatile and open source program for docking ligands to proteins and nucleic acids. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003571 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Corso, G. et al. DiffDock: diffusion steps, twists, and turns for molecular docking. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations 1–33 (2023).

  6. Ghersi, D. & Sanchez, R. Improving accuracy and efficiency of blind protein-ligand docking by focusing on predicted binding sites. Proteins 74, 417–424 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Buttenschoen, M., Morris, G. M. & Deane, C. M. PoseBusters: AI-based docking methods fail to generate physically valid poses or generalise to novel sequences. Chem. Sci. 15, 3130–3139 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yu, Y. et al. Do deep learning models really outperform traditional approaches in molecular docking? In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations Workshop on Machine Learning for Drug Discovery (MLDD) 1–7 (2023)

  9. Koes, D. R., Baumgartner, M. P. & Camacho, C. J. Lessons learned in empirical scoring with smina from the CSAR 2011 benchmarking exercise. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 53, 1893–1904 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. McNutt, A. T. et al. Gnina 1.0: molecular docking with deep learning. J. Cheminform. 13, 43 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakata, S., Mori, Y. & Tanaka, S. End-to-end protein–ligand complex structure generation with diffusion-based generative models. BMC Bioinform. 24, 233 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Qiao, Z., Nie, W., Vahdat, A., Miller, T. F. III & Anandkumar, A. State-specific protein–ligand complex structure prediction with a multiscale deep generative model. Nat. Mach. Intell. 6, 195–208 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Plainer, M. et al. DiffDock‑Pocket: diffusion for pocket‑level docking with sidechain flexibility. In NeurIPS 2023 Workshop on New Frontiers of AI for Drug Discovery and Development 1–26 (2023).

  14. Stärk, H. et al. EquiBind: geometric deep learning for drug binding structure prediction. In International Conference on Machine Learning 20503–20521 (PMLR, 2022).

  15. Krivák, R. & Hoksza, D. P2Rank: machine learning based tool for rapid and accurate prediction of ligand binding sites from protein structure. J. Cheminform. 10, 39 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Le Guilloux, V., Schmidtke, P. & Tuffery, P. Fpocket: an open source platform for ligand pocket detection. BMC Bioinform. 10, 168 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Raman, E. P. Template-based method for conformation generation and scoring for congeneric series of ligands. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 59, 2690–2701 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Whitehouse, A. J. et al. Development of inhibitors against Mycobacterium abscessus tRNA (m1G37) methyltransferase (TrmD) using fragment-based approaches. J. Med. Chem. 62, 7210–7232 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Parks, C. D. et al. D3R Grand Challenge 4: blind prediction of protein–ligand poses, affinity rankings, and relative binding free energies. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 34, 99–119 (2020).

  20. Dhariwal, P. & Nichol, A. Diffusion models beat GANs on image synthesis. In 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2021) https://proceedings.nips.cc/paper/2021/file/49ad23d1ec9fa4bd8d77d02681df5cfa-Paper.pdf (NeurIPS, 2021).

  21. Miñán, R. & rmincam. NBDsoftware/GDD: GeoDirDock 1.0. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15755564 (2025).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all members of Nostrum Biodiscovery for the help provided and insightful discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

J.G. and R.M. developed the model architecture and conducted the experiments. R.M. contributed to the dataset curation and preprocessing. R.M. implemented the evaluation framework and conducted benchmarking. J.G., R.M., Á.C. and A.M. conceived the project. Á.C. and A.M. supervised the research. R.M. and Á.C. wrote the manuscript. A.M. revised the final draft and provided corrections. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Álvaro Ciudad or Alexis Molina.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

R.M., Á.C. and A.M. are employees at Nostrum Biodiscovery. J.G. performed this work during an internship at Nostrum Biodiscovery.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Machine Intelligence thanks Alex Morehead, Shigenori Tanaka and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information

Supplementary Sections A–G, Figs. 1–13, Methods, Discussion and Results.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Miñán, R., Gallardo, J., Ciudad, Á. et al. Informed protein–ligand docking via geodesic guidance in translational, rotational and torsional spaces. Nat Mach Intell 7, 1555–1560 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-025-01091-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-025-01091-x

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing