The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A protein–protein docking benchmark
Abstract
We have developed a nonredundant benchmark for testing protein–protein docking algorithms. Currently it contains 59 test cases: 22 enzyme‐inhibitor complexes, 19 antibody‐antigen complexes, 11 other complexes, and 7 difficult test cases. Thirty‐one of the test cases, for which the unbound structures of both the receptor and ligand are available, are classified as follows: 16 enzyme‐inhibitor, 5 antibody‐antigen, 5 others, and 5 difficult. Such a centralized resource should benefit the docking community not only as a large curated test set but also as a common ground for comparing different algorithms. The benchmark is available at (http://zlab.bu.edu/∼rong/dock/benchmark.shtml). Proteins 2003;52:88–91. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs
Altschul, S. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.17.3389 · Cited by 73,302
Berman, H. M. (2000) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/28.1.235 · Cited by 40,196
The atomic structure of protein-protein recognition sites 1 1Edited by A. R. Fersht
Conte, L. L., Chothia, C., & Janin, J. (1999) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1998.2439 · Cited by 1,964
Self-citationDocking unbound proteins using shape complementarity, desolvation, and electrostatics
Chen, R., & Weng, Z. (2002) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10092 · Cited by 374
Self-citationComputer analysis of protein-protein interaction
Wodak, S. J., & Janin, J. (1978) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-2836(78)90302-9 · Cited by 277
Self-citationEvolutionary Computation in Bioinformatics
(2003) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-1-55860-797-2.x5000-8 · Cited by 120
Hemoglobin interaction in sickle cell fibers. I: Theoretical approaches to the molecular contacts.
Levinthal, C., Wodak, S. J., Kahn, P. C., & Dadivanian, A. K. (1975) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.72.4.1330 · Cited by 81
Cited by
The ClusPro web server for protein–protein docking
Kozakov, D., Hall, D. R., Xia, B., Porter, K. A., Padhorny, D., Yueh, C., Beglov, D., & Vajda, S. (2017) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2016.169 · Cited by 3,310
PatchDock and SymmDock: servers for rigid and symmetric docking
Schneidman-Duhovny, D., Inbar, Y., Nussinov, R., & Wolfson, H. J. (2005) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gki481 · Cited by 3,018
ZDOCK: An initial‐stage protein‐docking algorithm
Chen, R., Li, L., & Weng, Z. (2003) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10389 · Cited by 1,393
Self-citationPIPER: An FFT‐based protein docking program with pairwise potentials
Kozakov, D., Brenke, R., Comeau, S. R., & Vajda, S. (2006) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.21117 · Cited by 865
CAPRI: A Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions
Janin, J., Henrick, K., Moult, J., Eyck, L. T., Sternberg, M. J. E., Vajda, S., Vakser, I., & Wodak, S. J. (2003) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10381 · Cited by 703
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, R., Mintseris, J., Janin, J., & Weng, Z.
- Venue
- Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-05-14
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 88-91
- ISSN
- 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0134
- OpenAlex
- W2105438341
- Cited by
- 344
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 8.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A protein–protein docking benchmark. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/prot.10390
- The paper
- Chen, R., Mintseris, J., Janin, J., & Weng, Z. (2003). A protein–protein docking benchmark. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.10390
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
