ArticleProteins2019
Assessment of protein model structure accuracy estimation in CASP13: Challenges in the era of deep learning.
Article in Proteins, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient global accuracy estimation for protein complex structural models using multi-view representation learning.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- Challenges in bridging the gap between protein structure prediction and functional interpretation.Proteins · 2025Article
- Recent advances and challenges in protein complex model accuracy estimation.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- New prediction categories in CASP15.Proteins · 2023Article
- Assessing protein model quality based on deep graph coupled networks using protein language model.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2023Article
- iQDeep: an integrated web server for protein scoring using multiscale deep learning models.Journal of molecular biology · 2023Article
- Predicting residue-specific qualities of individual protein models using residual neural networks and graph neural networks.Proteins · 2022Article
- Article
- Ins and outs of AlphaFold2 transmembrane protein structure predictions.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022Article
- Article
- Assessment of protein model structure accuracy estimation in CASP14: Old and new challenges.Proteins · 2021Article
- Modeling SARS-CoV-2 proteins in the CASP-commons experiment.Proteins · 2021Article
- Fast and effective protein model refinement using deep graph neural networks.Nature computational science · 2021Article
- Protein model accuracy estimation empowered by deep learning and inter-residue distance prediction in CASP14.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- GraphQA: protein model quality assessment using graph convolutional networks.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Improved Sampling Strategies for Protein Model Refinement Based on Molecular Dynamics Simulation.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2021Article
- Improved protein structure refinement guided by deep learning based accuracy estimation.Nature communications · 2021Article
- SPServer: split-statistical potentials for the analysis of protein structures and protein-protein interactions.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Application of docking methodologies to modeled proteins.Proteins · 2020Article
- Using physical features of protein core packing to distinguish real proteins from decoys.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Scoring model structure is an essential component of protein structure prediction that can affect the prediction accuracy tremendously. Users of protein structure prediction results also need to score models to select the best models for their application studies. In Critical Assessment of techniques for protein Structure Prediction (CASP), model accuracy estimation methods have been tested in a blind fashion by providing models submitted by the tertiary structure prediction servers for scoring. In CASP13, model accuracy estimation results were evaluated in terms of both global and local structure accuracy. Global structure accuracy estimation was evaluated by the quality of the models selected by the global structure scores and by the absolute estimates of the global scores. Residue-wise, local structure accuracy estimations were evaluated by three different measures. A new measure introduced in CASP13 evaluates the ability to predict inaccurately modeled regions that may be improved by refinement. An intensive comparative analysis on CASP13 and the previous CASPs revealed that the tertiary structure models generated by the CASP13 servers show very distinct features. Higher consensus toward models of higher global accuracy appeared even for free modeling targets, and many models of high global accuracy were not well optimized at the atomic level. This is related to the new technology in CASP13, deep learning for tertiary contact prediction. The tertiary model structures generated by deep learning pose a new challenge for EMA (estimation of model accuracy) method developers. Model accuracy estimation itself is also an area where deep learning can potentially have an impact, although current EMA methods have not fully explored that direction.
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.