跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.08249 · v1

Geometric Relevance Is Not Sufficient: Evaluating Focused Post-Training Supervision in Diffusion Docking

首次提交 2026-11-06 00:26
版本更新 2026-11-06 00:26
雷达观测 2026-11-06 12:09
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Diffusion-based molecular docking requires learning a corrective score field across a broad corruption distribution, yet individual pose errors can differ substantially in their structural consequences. This creates a post-training conflict between preserving broad score-field coverage and concentrating supervision on corrections that appear more relevant to docking geometry. Using DiffDock, a fixed-budget study compares broad continuation with torsional supervision focused on Cartesian consequence or conditional target consistency, and with a broad/focused mixture. Evaluation separates fixed score fidelity, generated-pose quality, best-of-10 sampling capacity, and confidence-selected Top-1 docking performance. At <5 Angstrom, broad continuation had the highest mean Top-1 success among trained policies, and focused or mixed supervision showed no consistent advantage under the tested budget. The starting model had better fixed score fidelity, whereas the evaluated broad-continuation model had higher mean Top-1 success with the same aggregate best-of-10 recovery. Focusing supervision on structurally consequential or more consistently specified corrections did not consistently improve returned-pose success over broad continuation.

作者备注:17 pages, 5 figures; accepted at the NeurIPS 2026 AI4DD Workshop

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-06 00:26 · 最新观测版本

Geometric Relevance Is Not Sufficient: Evaluating Focused Post-Training Supervision in Diffusion Docking

Diffusion-based molecular docking requires learning a corrective score field across a broad corruption distribution, yet individual pose errors can differ substantially in their structural consequences. This creates a post-training conflict between preserving broad score-field coverage and concentrating supervision on corrections that appear more relevant to docking geometry. Using DiffDock, a fixed-budget study compares broad continuation with torsional supervision focused on Cartesian consequence or conditional target consistency, and with a broad/focused mixture. Evaluation separates fixed score fidelity, generated-pose quality, best-of-10 sampling capacity, and confidence-selected Top-1 docking performance. At <5 Angstrom, broad continuation had the highest mean Top-1 success among trained policies, and focused or mixed supervision showed no consistent advantage under the tested budget. The starting model had better fixed score fidelity, whereas the evaluated broad-continuation model had higher mean Top-1 success with the same aggregate best-of-10 recovery. Focusing supervision on structurally consequential or more consistently specified corrections did not consistently improve returned-pose success over broad continuation.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗