Score_set: A CAPRI benchmark for scoring protein complexes

By Marc F. Lensink, Shoshana J. Wodak. 2014

79 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computational Theory and Mathematics, 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 Computational Theory and Mathematics

1. Björn Wallner
2. Sankar Basu
3. Petras J. Kundrotas
4. Ivan V. Anishchenko
5. Taras Dauzhenka
6. Ian Kotthoff
7. Daniil Mnevets
8. Matthew M. Copeland

In Materials Chemistry

1. Petras J. Kundrotas
2. Ivan V. Anishchenko
3. Taras Dauzhenka
4. Ian Kotthoff
5. Daniil Mnevets
6. Matthew M. Copeland
7. Ilya A. Vakser
8. Björn Wallner

In Molecular Biology

1. Björn Wallner
2. Petras J. Kundrotas
3. Taras Dauzhenka
4. Sankar Basu
5. Ilya A. Vakser
6. Ivan V. Anishchenko
7. Arne Elofsson
8. Ian Kotthoff

Citations in the corpus

• DockQ: A Quality Measure for Protein-Protein Docking Models (2016, methodology): “For independent testing, a subset based on the CAPRI Score_set [19] (http://cb.iri.univ-lille1. fr/Users/lensink/Score_set/) containing models submitted to CAPRI between 2005 – 2014 with their respective CAPRI quality measure (F nat , LRMS, iRMS) was assembled.”
• Dockground: A comprehensive data resource for modeling of protein complexes (2018, background): “26 Comparative docking relies on target/template relationships based on sequence 27 sequence/structure (threading), and structure similarity 27–31 with the latter showing a great promise in terms of availability of the templates.”
• Finding correct protein–protein docking models using ProQDock (2016, unknown): “1 Training set To train ProQDock, two benchmark sets of protein–protein docking models were used, the ‘CAPRI’ set (Lensink and Wodak, 2014), which contains 19 013 models from 15 targets submitted to the CAPRI scoring experiment, and the ‘MOAL’ set (Moal et al.”