Abstract
The prediction of binding free energy changes ($\Delta \Delta G$) caused by mutations in protein complexes is crucial for understanding disease mechanisms and designing antibodies. Approximately 60% of pathogenic missense mutations lead to functional abnormalities by disrupting molecular interactions. However, although existing $\Delta \Delta G$ predictors exhibit strong performance in benchmarks, they suffer from inadequate generalization, a misalignment between evaluation metrics and practical needs, and poor adaptability to complex mutation scenarios. This study systematically assessed eight mainstream predictors, covering both physical energy function-based and machine learning-based methods, and constructed an independent evaluation set. This study employed multi-dimensional metrics, including regression accuracy and classification capability, while also analyzing the performance variations of predictors across different mutation types, stability categories, and microenvironments of protein mutation sites. The results indicate that >60% of predictors (5 out of 8) predictors exhibit a systematic bias toward overestimating mutational instability. In the three-class classification task, predictors demonstrate a limited ability to identify stabilizing mutations ($\Delta \Delta G< -0.5$ kcal/mol), with recall rates <0.1 for this class, and overall predictive efficacy depends on the protein local structure. In summary, this study reveals the limitations of current $\Delta \Delta G$ predictors in terms of generalization and adaptability to complex scenarios, thus providing a reference for the optimization and practical application of $\Delta \Delta G$ prediction methods. It suggests that future breakthroughs can be achieved by constructing balanced and standardized datasets alongside developing local-global fusion algorithms.