ArticleScientific reports2018
An analysis and evaluation of the WeFold collaborative for protein structure prediction and its pipelines in CASP11 and CASP12.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protein folding: Funnel model revised.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Role of environmental specificity in CASP results.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- The Possible Mechanism of Amyloid Transformation Based on the Geometrical Parameters of Early-Stage Intermediate in Silico Model for Protein Folding.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Hybrid methods for combined experimental and computational determination of protein structure.The Journal of chemical physics · 2020Review
- Improved Consensus-Fragment Selection in Template-Assisted Prediction of Protein Structures with the UNRES Force Field in CASP13.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2020Article
- Assessment of protein model structure accuracy estimation in CASP13: Challenges in the era of deep learning.Proteins · 2019Article
- GalaxyRefine2: simultaneous refinement of inaccurate local regions and overall protein structure.Nucleic acids research · 2019Article
- A Nonlinear Support Vector Machine-Based Feature Selection Approach for Fault Detection and Diagnosis: Application to the Tennessee Eastman Process.AIChE journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers · 2019Article
- Grouping of complex substances using analytical chemistry data: A framework for quantitative evaluation and visualization.PloS one · 2019Article
- Analysis validation has been neglected in the Age of Reproducibility.PLoS biology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
74 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Every two years groups worldwide participate in the Critical Assessment of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) experiment to blindly test the strengths and weaknesses of their computational methods. CASP has significantly advanced the field but many hurdles still remain, which may require new ideas and collaborations. In 2012 a web-based effort called WeFold, was initiated to promote collaboration within the CASP community and attract researchers from other fields to contribute new ideas to CASP. Members of the WeFold coopetition (cooperation and competition) participated in CASP as individual teams, but also shared components of their methods to create hybrid pipelines and actively contributed to this effort. We assert that the scale and diversity of integrative prediction pipelines could not have been achieved by any individual lab or even by any collaboration among a few partners. The models contributed by the participating groups and generated by the pipelines are publicly available at the WeFold website providing a wealth of data that remains to be tapped. Here, we analyze the results of the 2014 and 2016 pipelines showing improvements according to the CASP assessment as well as areas that require further adjustments and research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.