The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction—Round VII
Open accessAbstract
This article is an introduction to the special issue of the journal Proteins, dedicated to the eighth CASP experiment to assess the state of the art in protein structure prediction. The article describes the conduct of the experiment, the categories of prediction included, and outlines the evaluation and assessment procedures. Highlights are the first blind assessment of model refinement methods showing that under some circumstances substantial model improvements are possible; improvements in the performance of methods for determining the accuracy of a model; and some progress in the accuracy of comparative models in regions not present in a principal template. Against these advances must be stacked the fact that there is no detectable progress in model quality compared with CASP7 in either template-based or template free modeling, using the established CASP measures.
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
Intrinsically unstructured proteins and their functions
Dyson, H. J., & Wright, P. E. (2005) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/nrm1589 · Cited by 3,871
LGA: a method for finding 3D similarities in protein structures
Zemla, A. (2003) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkg571 · Cited by 1,069
A large‐scale experiment to assess protein structure prediction methods
Moult, J., Pedersen, J. T., Judson, R., & Fidelis, K. (1995) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.340230303 · Cited by 555
Self-citation
Cited by
Protein 3D Structure Computed from Evolutionary Sequence Variation
Marks, D. S., Colwell, L. J., Sheridan, R., Hopf, T. A., Pagnani, A., Zecchina, R., & Sander, C. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028766 · Cited by 1,144
How significant is a protein structure similarity with TM-score = 0.5?
Xu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq066 · Cited by 1,142
Variability in docking success rates due to dataset preparation.
Corbeil, C. R., Williams, C. I., & Labute, P. (2012) · Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design · doi:10.1007/s10822-012-9570-1 · Cited by 469
Protein structure prediction: when is it useful?
Zhang, Y. (2009) · Current Opinion in Structural Biology · doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2009.02.005 · Cited by 277
Templates are available to model nearly all complexes of structurally characterized proteins
Kundrotas, P. J., Zhu, Z., Janin, J., & Vakser, I. A. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1200678109 · Cited by 179
Metadata
- Authors
- Moult, J., Fidelis, K., Kryshtafovych, A., Rost, B., Hubbard, T., & Tramontano, A.
- Venue
- Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- S8
- Pages
- 3-9
- ISSN
- 0887-3585 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0134
- OpenAlex
- W2089035513
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 17.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction—Round VII. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/prot.21767
- The paper
- Moult, J., Fidelis, K., Kryshtafovych, A., Rost, B., Hubbard, T., & Tramontano, A. (2007). Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction—Round VII. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.21767
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.
