Retrieving homologous protein sequences is essential for a broad range of protein modeling tasks such as fitness prediction, protein design, structure modeling, and protein-protein interactions. Traditional workflows have relied on a two-step process: first retrieving homologs via Multiple Sequence Alignments (MSA), then training mod- els on one or more of these alignments. However, MSA-based retrieval is computationally expensive, struggles with highly divergent sequences or complex insertions & deletions patterns, and operates independently of the downstream modeling objective. We introduce Protriever, an end-to-end differentiable framework that learns to retrieve relevant homologs while simultaneously training for the target task. When applied to protein fitness prediction, Protriever achieves state-of-the-art performance compared to sequence-based models that rely on MSA-based homolog retrieval, while being two orders of magnitude faster through efficient vector search. Protriever is both architecture and task-agnostic, and can flexibly adapt to different retrieval strategies and protein databases at inference time – offering a scalable alternative to alignment-centric approaches.

Reliable prediction of protein variant effects is crucial for both protein optimization and for advancing biological understanding. For practical use in protein engineering, it is important that we can also provide reliable uncertainty estimates for our predictions, and while prediction accuracy has seen much progress in recent years, uncertainty metrics are rarely reported. We here provide a Gaussian process regression model, Kermut, with a novel composite kernel for modeling mutation similarity, which obtains state-of-the-art performance for supervised protein variant effect prediction while also offering estimates of uncertainty through its posterior. An analysis of the quality of the uncertainty estimates demonstrates that our model provides meaningful levels of overall calibration, but that instance-specific uncertainty calibration remains more challenging.

To optimize proteins for particular traits holds great promise for industrial and pharmaceutical purposes. Machine Learning is increasingly applied in this field to predict properties of proteins, thereby guiding the experimental optimization process. A natural question is: How much progress are we making with such predictions, and how important is the choice of regressor and representation? In this paper, we demonstrate that different assessment criteria for regressor performance can lead to dramatically different conclusions, depending on the choice of metric, and how one defines generalization. We highlight the fundamental issues of sample bias in typical regression scenarios and how this can lead to misleading conclusions about regressor performance. Finally, we make the case for the importance of calibrated uncertainty in this domain.