ArticleGenome biology2026
Taxonomy-aware, disorder-matched benchmarking of phase-separating protein predictors.
Article in Genome biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Taxonomy-aware, disorder-matched benchmarking of phase-separating protein predictors.Genome biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBiomolecular condensates formed via liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) play vital roles in cellular organization and function. Computational prediction of phase-separating proteins (PSPs) is increasingly used to prioritize candidates at proteome scale, making robust, well-designed benchmarks essential for fair evaluation and iterative improvement of PSP predictors.
resultsWe first show that a recently released PSP benchmark is substantially confounded by the imbalances in taxonomic origin and intrinsic-disorder compositions between positive and negative sets, allowing predictors to achieve high apparent performance by exploiting non-LLPS shortcuts and obscuring their true ability to distinguish PSPs. To minimize these effects, we construct a taxonomy-aware, disorder-matched PSP benchmark. Using this benchmark, we find that absolute sequence and biophysical feature values of PSPs differ markedly across taxa, whereas LLPS-associated feature shifts relative to taxon-specific proteome backgrounds are comparatively conserved. Benchmarking nineteen PSP predictors under this framework reveals pronounced taxon-dependent variation in performance. Moreover, PSPs lacking intrinsically disordered regions consistently constitute a more challenging regime across methods, motivating routine disorder-stratified evaluation.
conclusionsOur taxonomy-aware, disorder-matched benchmarking framework reduces shortcut-driven biases, enables more interpretable evaluation of PSP predictors, and provides guidance for developing models that capture transferable LLPS-associated signals rather than dataset- or taxon-specific shortcuts.
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.