Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31436360›Full record

ArticleProteins2019

Assessment of protein model structure accuracy estimation in CASP13: Challenges in the era of deep learning.

Jonghun Won, Minkyung Baek, Bohdan Monastyrskyy, Andriy Kryshtafovych, Chaok Seok

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Recent advances and challenges in protein complex model accuracy estimation.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Ins and outs of AlphaFold2 transmembrane protein structure predictions.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Using physical features of protein core packing to distinguish real proteins from decoys.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jonghun WonDepartment of Chemistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Minkyung BaekDepartment of Chemistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Bohdan MonastyrskyyGenome Center, University of California, Davis, California.
Andriy KryshtafovychGenome Center, University of California, Davis, California.ORCID 0000-0001-5066-7178
Chaok SeokDepartment of Chemistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1419-9888

Funding

Prospective analysis to determine model accuracy performance and boundaries in the post-AlphaFold2 environmentR01GM100482 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI FIDELIS, KRZYSZTOF A · 2012 to 2025
$11.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM100482NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM100482
6 · The paper itself

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

Computational BiologyModels, MolecularProtein ConformationAlgorithmsDatabases, ProteinDeep LearningProteinsSequence Analysis, ProteinSoftwareProteinsCASP13 assessmentestimation of protein model accuracyprotein model quality assessmentprotein structure prediction

Identifiers

PMID31436360
PMCPMC6851486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.