Evaluation of disorder predictions in CASP5

By Eugene Melamud, John Moult. 2003

101 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Materials Chemistry, Molecular Biology

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Materials Chemistry

In Molecular Biology

Citations in the corpus

Prediction of intrinsic disorder and its use in functional proteomics. (2007, methodology): “Later, more sophisticated methods based on various statistical and machinelearning techniques (including bagging and boosting [59] and linear regression model for the prediction of long disordered regions [60]) emerged, culminating in the inclusion of the disorder prediction as a separate category i”
Comprehensive comparative assessment of in-silico predictors of disordered regions. (2012, methodology): “The disorder prediction was included in the biannual CASP experiments since 2002 [[14]-[17]].”
Showing your ID: intrinsic disorder as an ID for recognition, regulation and cell signaling (2005, background): “The ability to predict disorder from sequence with good accuracy (Melamud and Moult, 2003) in a truly blind experiment adds confidence in the results obtained by disorder predictions.”
Predicting intrinsic disorder from amino acid sequence (2003, background): “target was indicated both by NMR and by CD spectroscopy.(5)”
Comprehensive review of methods for prediction of intrinsic disorder and its molecular functions (2017, methodology): “Prediction of intrinsic disorder was included in the CASP starting with CASP5 in 2002 [89] and until CASP10 in 2012 [87].”
Prediction and functional analysis of native disorder in proteins from the three kingdoms of life. (2004, methodology): “The classifier, DISOPRED2, is benchmarked on targets from the last critical assessment of structure prediction (CASP) experiment, which included an evaluation of the latest disorder prediction methods.(9) The new method is also used to investigate”
Assessment of disorder predictions in CASP6 (2005, unknown): “Twenty groups participated in disorder prediction in CASP6, compared to only six groups in CASP5.(6)”
Evaluation of disorder predictions in CASP9 (2011, background): “28–31 A residue was considered to be in a disordered state if it appeared in the protein’s amino acid sequence but either (1) lacked the spatial coordinates or (2) showed a high conformational variability across different X-ray chains or NMR models.”
Intrinsic disorder and functional proteomics. (2007, background): “The development of different ID predictors was dramatically stimulated by including disorder prediction as a separate category in the CASP experiments (76,77).”
Length-dependent prediction of protein intrinsic disorder (2006, background): “Compared to other performance measures, such as Q2 score (percentage of all correctly predicted residues) [62] and Matthews' correlation coefficient [63], the ACC measure is more suitable for datasets of imbalanced class proportions.”
DISOPRED3: precise disordered region predictions with annotated protein-binding activity (2014, methodology): “CASP (Critical Assessment of techniques for protein Structure Prediction) has been testing these predictors since 2002 (Melamud and Moult, 2003) and has tracked moderate progress since.”