Methods for estimation of model accuracy in CASP12

Arne Elofsson, Keehyoung Joo, Chen Keasar, Jooyoung Lee, Ali H.A. Maghrabi, Balachandran Manavalan, Liam J. McGuffin, David Ménendez Hurtado, Claudio Mirabello, Robert Pilstål, Tomer Sidi, Karolis Uziela, Björn Wallner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

27 Scopus citations

Abstract

Methods to reliably estimate the quality of 3D models of proteins are essential drivers for the wide adoption and serious acceptance of protein structure predictions by life scientists. In this article, the most successful groups in CASP12 describe their latest methods for estimates of model accuracy (EMA). We show that pure single model accuracy estimation methods have shown clear progress since CASP11; the 3 top methods (MESHI, ProQ3, SVMQA) all perform better than the top method of CASP11 (ProQ2). Although the pure single model accuracy estimation methods outperform quasi-single (ModFOLD6 variations) and consensus methods (Pcons, ModFOLDclust2, Pcomb-domain, and Wallner) in model selection, they are still not as good as those methods in absolute model quality estimation and predictions of local quality. Finally, we show that when using contact-based model quality measures (CAD, lDDT) the single model quality methods perform relatively better.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)361-373
Number of pages13
JournalProteins: Structure, Function and Bioinformatics
Volume86
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Mar 2018

Keywords

  • CASP
  • consensus predictions
  • estimates of model accuracy
  • machine learning
  • protein structure prediction
  • quality assessment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Structural Biology
  • Biochemistry
  • Molecular Biology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Methods for estimation of model accuracy in CASP12'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this