Quantifying Cross-Attention Interaction in Transformers for Interpreting TCR-pMHC Binding
Jiarui Li, Zixiang Yin, Haley Smith, Zhengming Ding, Samuel J. Landry, Ramgopal R. Mettu

TL;DR
This paper introduces QCAI, a novel post-hoc interpretability method for transformer models in TCR-pMHC binding, validated on a new benchmark with experimental structures, improving understanding of immune recognition mechanisms.
Contribution
We developed QCAI, the first method to interpret cross-attention in transformer decoders for TCR-pMHC binding, and created TCR-XAI, a benchmark with experimental data for evaluation.
Findings
QCAI outperforms existing methods in interpretability and accuracy.
TCR-XAI benchmark correlates well with experimental amino acid interactions.
QCAI enhances mechanistic understanding of T cell immune responses.
Abstract
CD8+ "killer" T cells and CD4+ "helper" T cells play a central role in the adaptive immune system by recognizing antigens presented by Major Histocompatibility Complex (pMHC) molecules via T Cell Receptors (TCRs). Modeling binding between T cells and the pMHC complex is fundamental to understanding basic mechanisms of human immune response as well as in developing therapies. While transformer-based models such as TULIP have achieved impressive performance in this domain, their black-box nature precludes interpretability and thus limits a deeper mechanistic understanding of T cell response. Most existing post-hoc explainable AI (XAI) methods are confined to encoder-only, co-attention, or model-specific architectures and cannot handle encoder-decoder transformers used in TCR-pMHC modeling. To address this gap, we propose Quantifying Cross-Attention Interaction (QCAI), a new post-hoc…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
Methods to explain cross-attention in transformers are needed to go beyond their use as “black boxes”. The tested case is timely and interesting for the community working in molecular biology. The benchmark dataset curated by the authors can also be useful.
If I understand correctly, the task in which the authors test their method is rather hard: all the competitors perform in a way that is comparable or worse than random chance (Fig. 2), showing biased assessment. For a method which is “potential to be applied to other fields”, as the authors claim, other applications, where explainable methods work more reliably, should be tested.
- The primary strength is providing an explainable AI method for encoder-decoder transformers, like TULIP, which current methods designed for encoder-only models cannot adequately interpret. - QCAI's performance is validated against a suite of competing methods (e.g., AttnLRP, TokenTM, Rollout) using ROC analysis, two different perturbation metrics (AOPC and LOdds) , and the authors' own BRHR metric, demonstrating SOTA results across most of them.
- The paper explicitly states that QCAI is up to 50x slower per sample than other methods due to the necessary pseudo-inverse operations. - The new TCR-XAI benchmark is heavily skewed towards MHC-I samples, which may limit the generalizability of the findings for MHC-II complexes. - The benchmark relies on atomic distance as a "proxy for ground-truth importance". An assessment based on an energy function would have been more appropriate
1\. This work offers insights into the important problem of interaction interpretation in immune-proteins. Considering the scarcity of data and limited prediction performance of existing models, a reliable interpretation method would allow maximal use of available data and models. The method and findings could potentially guide rational design of TCRs and respective immunotherapy. 2\. The authors provide solid theoretical justifications of the methodology as well as practical insights. 3\. The
Despite the sound problem setup and results, my major concern is the limited application both within and beyond the domain of TCR-pMHC. Specifically: 1\. The scope of the defined task and the respective benchmark dataset is somewhat limited. Distance is not the only indicator of interaction and only weakly indicates "importance" overall, considering residue contributions to TCR-pMHC interactions are somewhat additive (smaller, weaker interactions than dominating hotspots). Though that may be ha
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
