ArticleBMC bioinformatics2026
Reciprocal best matching: a new pipeline for scoring models with unknown stoichiometry in CASP experiments.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate prediction of protein complex structures remains a significant challenge, particularly when stoichiometry information is unavailable. In the recent Critical Assessment of Structure Prediction Round XVI (CASP16), the “Phase 0” challenge was introduced to stimulate progress in this area. However, existing evaluation tools, such as OpenStructure, might introduce systematic biases when evaluating models with stoichiometries different from the target, sometimes favoring those with excess subunits and inflating scores for models with incorrect stoichiometries.
resultsTo address this issue, we developed the Reciprocal Best Matching (RBM) pipeline. RBM compares predicted and target structures by bidirectionally matching interfaces and assigning penalizations to unmatched interfaces. This approach penalizes incorrect stoichiometries in a consistent and unbiased manner while preserving strong correlation with established CASP metrics. Application of RBM in CASP16 assessments revealed improved discrimination between correctly and incorrectly stoichiometric models.
conclusionsOur method, RBM, could correct the systematic bias in the existing assessment protocol for protein complex structure prediction without stoichiometry information. We provide a standalone software implementation of our RBM pipeline to stimulate further method development in protein complex structure prediction and to support future CASP experiments.
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.