CASP8 results in context of previous experiments

By Andriy Kryshtafovych, Krzysztof Fidelis, John Moult. 2009

47 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The quality of structure models submitted to CASP8 is analyzed in the context of previous CASPs. To compare models from the latest experiment with their predecessors, we use the approaches consistent with the previous articles in this series. Using the basic evaluation measures accepted in CASP, there were no noticeable advances in the quality of the methods in any of the target difficulty categories. At the same time, there were three positive developments: (1) for set of the best models on each target, CASP8 registered the highest number of cases from all CASPs where alignment accuracy exceeded the maximum possible from the best template; (2) modeling accuracy of regions not present in the best template has improved; and (3) the loss in modeling quality from selection of nonoptimal models as the best ones submitted on the target has decreased. Proteins 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Subfields: Materials Chemistry, Molecular Biology

Citations in the corpus

• CASP10 results compared to those of previous CASP experiments (2013, neutral): “4.”
• Status of GPCR modeling and docking as reflected by community-wide GPCR Dock 2010 assessment (2011, unknown): “The average/best GDT-TS values were 73%/80% for D3 and 55%/60% for CXCR4, which is within the range of prediction accuracy observed in CASP for targets of similar difficulty (Kryshtafovych et al., 2005, 2009).”