ArticleFrontiers in bioinformatics2026
Architectural good practices for reproducible benchmarking in protein machine learning.
Article in Frontiers in 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reliable benchmarking in protein machine learning requires biological tasks, datasets, representations, execution conditions, and evaluation regimes to be explicitly defined and traceable. Protein-specific dependencies, including label semantics, negative-class construction, evolutionary relationships, similarity control, inferred structures, protein language model configurations, and potential pretraining contamination, can alter benchmark interpretation. This Perspective provides an operational, protein-specific synthesis of established reproducibility practices through an artefact-linked architecture. We define five core requirements for verifiable benchmarking, including deterministic curation, persistent and versioned artefacts, explicit interface contracts, reproducible execution, and transparent evaluation. Prediction provenance, uncertainty, calibration, and explainability are treated as an additional decision-readiness layer. These requirements are translated into minimum records, provenance links, and verification checks. An antimicrobial peptide classification case study demonstrates their application to alternative task formulations, negative-class definitions, dataset compositions, and partitioning strategies within a controlled workflow.
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.