Non-identifiability and the Blessings of Misspecification in Models of Molecular Fitness
Eli N. Weinstein, Alan Nawzad Amin, Jonathan Frazer, Debora S. Marks
Abstract
Understanding the consequences of mutation for molecular fitness and function is a fundamental problem in biology. Recently, generative probabilistic models have emerged as a powerful tool for estimating fitness from evolutionary sequence data, with accuracy sufficient to predict both laboratory measurements of function and disease risk in humans, and to design novel functional proteins. Existing techniques rest on an assumed relationship between density estimation and fitness estimation, a relationship that we interrogate in this article. We prove that fitness is not identifiable from observational sequence data alone, placing fundamental limits on our ability to disentangle fitness landscapes from phylogenetic history. We show on real datasets that perfect density estimation in the limit of infinite data would, with high confidence, result in poor fitness estimation; current models perform accurate fitness estimation because of, not despite, misspecification. Our results challenge the conventional wisdom that bigger models trained on bigger datasets will inevitably lead to better fitness estimation, and suggest novel estimation strategies going forward.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 01602966-b3d6-42f7-9703-0b6544fc3b2bCited by top-tier papers8
- PoET: A generative model of protein families as sequences-of-sequencesTimothy F. Truong Jr., Tristan BeplerNeurIPS 2023 · 96 citations
- Scaling Unlocks Broader Generation and Deeper Functional Understanding of ProteinsAadyot Bhatnagar, Sarthak Jain, Joel Beazer, Samuel Curran et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 63 citations
- Feature Reuse and Scaling: Understanding Transfer Learning with Protein Language ModelsFrancesca-Zhoufan Li, Ava P. Amini, Yisong Yue, Kevin K. Yang et al.ICML 2024 · 61 citations
- Understanding protein function with a multimodal retrieval-augmented foundation modelTimothy F. Truong Jr., Tristan BeplerNeurIPS 2025 · 15 citations
- From Likelihood to Fitness: Improving Variant Effect Prediction in Protein and Genome Language ModelsCharles W. J. Pugh, Paulina G. Nuñez-Valencia, Mafalda Dias, Jonathan FrazerNeurIPS 2025 · 12 citations
Builds on8
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Language models enable zero-shot prediction of the effects of mutations on protein functionJoshua Meier, Roshan Rao, Robert Verkuil, Jason Liu et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 969 citations
- MSA TransformerRoshan Rao, Jason Liu, Robert Verkuil, Joshua Meier et al.ICML 2021 · 686 citations
- A Universal Law of Robustness via IsoperimetrySébastien Bubeck, Mark SellkeNeurIPS 2021 · 260 citations
- Tranception: Protein Fitness Prediction with Autoregressive Transformers and Inference-time RetrievalPascal Notin, Mafalda Dias, Jonathan Frazer, Javier Marchena-Hurtado et al.ICML 2022 · 236 citations
Related papers
- Protein Language Model Fitness is a Matter of PreferenceCade W. Gordon, Amy X. Lu, Pieter AbbeelICLR 2025
- A Variational Perspective on Generative Protein Fitness OptimizationLea Bogensperger, Dominik Narnhofer, Ahmed Allam, Konrad Schindler et al.ICML 2025
- Steering Generative Models with Experimental Data for Protein Fitness OptimizationJason Yang, Wenda Chu, Daniel Khalil, Raul Astudillo et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 13 citations
- Contrastive losses as generalized models of global epistasisDavid H. Brookes, Jakub Otwinowski, Sam SinaiNeurIPS 2024 · 8 citations
- A Structured Observation Distribution for Generative Biological Sequence Prediction and ForecastingEli N. Weinstein, Debora S. MarksICML 2021 · 12 citations
