Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35072956›Full record

ArticleProteins2022

Dockground scoring benchmarks for protein docking.

Ian Kotthoff, Petras J Kundrotas, Ilya A Vakser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteins, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Ian KotthoffComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
Petras J KundrotasComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.
Ilya A VakserComputational Biology Program, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5743-2934

Funding

Integrated Resource for Protein Recognition StudiesR01GM074255 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI VAKSER, ILYA · 2005 to 2024
$6.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM074255
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein docking protocols typically involve global docking scan, followed by re-ranking of the scan predictions by more accurate scoring functions that are either computationally too expensive or algorithmically impossible to include in the global scan. Development and validation of scoring methodologies are often performed on scoring benchmark sets (docking decoys) which offer concise and nonredundant representation of the global docking scan output for a large and diverse set of protein-protein complexes. Two such protein-protein scoring benchmarks were built for the Dockground resource, which contains various datasets for the development and testing of protein docking methodologies. One set was generated based on the Dockground unbound docking benchmark 4, and the other based on protein models from the Dockground model-model benchmark 2. The docking decoys were designed to reflect the reality of the real-case docking applications (e.g., correct docking predictions defined as near-native rather than native structures), and to minimize applicability of approaches not directly related to the development of scoring functions (reducing clustering of predictions in the binding funnel and disparity in structural quality of the near-native and nonnative matches). The sets were further characterized by the source organism and the function of the protein-protein complexes. The sets, freely available to the research community on the Dockground webpage, present a unique, user-friendly resource for the developing and testing of protein-protein scoring approaches.

Indexed as

ProteinsMolecular Docking SimulationProtein BindingProtein ConformationProteinsmodeling of protein complexesprotein bindingprotein interactionsstructure datasetsstructure prediction

Identifiers

PMID35072956
PMCPMC9018566

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.