These binders target the cryptic pocket discovered in PDB: 8XPY. Boltz2 can't see this binding mode hence the low ipsae (and incorrect complex predictions!!). If you template AF3 with the target from 8XPY you can see the correct binding modes. I didn't mean to target a different spot than everyone else!! That's just the pdb they listed in the initial twitter post. I will admit that this cryptic pocket is way easier.
These designs were NOT tested experimentally in any capacity.
My design method looks a lot like Cao et. al. 2022 just with RFDiffusion instead of RifDock and Rosetta. I also hand-filtered the designs at several steps along the way (does this backbone look like it could work?)
Correct docks: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cJFjN1RbdAcV84lpOptIQlj93JAgdUdT/view?usp=sharing
id: solid-swan-ember

Multiple (2)
Strong (6)
True
9.3 kDa
86
id: quick-mole-snow

Multiple (2)
Medium (2), Strong (4)
True
12.7 kDa
116
id: golden-fox-marble

Multiple (2)
Medium (6)
True
12.5 kDa
114
id: brisk-bear-wave

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
None
53.74
True
10.8 kDa
99
id: quick-quail-ash

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
None
84.62
True
12.2 kDa
110
id: amber-tiger-moss

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
None
67.65
True
12.3 kDa
111
id: deep-tiger-leaf

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
None
64.01
True
10.9 kDa
95
id: shy-shark-cloud

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
0.24
89.07
--
10.8 kDa
95
id: quick-jaguar-reed

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
0.00
87.89
--
13.5 kDa
120
id: quick-wolf-ember

Nipah Virus Glycoprotein G
0.49
87.14
--
10.9 kDa
98