ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Could statistical potential models achieve comparable or better performance than deep learning models?
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmark competitiveness and generalization are not equivalent: a critical commentary on HybridSP.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Discussions on the generalization of HybridSP on more equivalent benchmarks.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurately predicting protein-ligand interactions is vital for structure-based drug discovery. Although deep learning (DL) models have shown strong performance, the potential of traditional statistical potentials under data-limited conditions remains underexplored. Here, we systematically assess several statistical potential models in docking and virtual screening. We find that docking benefits from distance-dependent pairwise atom-atom potentials with clear physical meanings, while screening relies more on orientation-dependent atom-residue potentials that capture local chemical environments. Based on these findings, we propose HybridSP, a hybrid potential combining distance-dependent atom-atom, atom-residue, and orientation-dependent atom-residue terms. An affinity-weighted scheme is applied to correct biases in statistical distributions. On the CASF-2016 benchmark, HybridSP achieves a 91.6% docking success rate and an enrichment factor of 29.35 at the top 1%, rivaling and even surpassing state-of-the-art DL models. Its strong screening ability is further validated on directory of useful decoys-enhanced and directory of useful decoys-adjusted. These results demonstrate that well-designed statistical potentials can achieve high performance and interpretability without complex DL architectures, offering an efficient alternative for scoring function design. The models are available at: https://github.com/zelixirSH/HybridSP.git.
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.