EC-Bench: a benchmark for enzyme commission number prediction
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Motivation: Enzymes are proteins that catalyze specific biochemical reactions in cells. Enzyme Commission (EC) numbers are used to annotate enzymes in a four-level hierarchy that classifies enzymes based on the specific chemical reactions they catalyze. Accurate EC number prediction is essential for understanding enzyme functions. Despite the availability of numerous methods for predicting EC numbers from protein sequences, there is no unified framework for evaluating and studying such methods systematically. This gap limits the ability of the community to identify the most effective approaches for enzyme annotation. Results: We introduce EC-Bench, a benchmark for EC number prediction, consisting of (i) an initial representative set of existing methods (including homology-based, deep learning, contrastive learning, and language model methods), (ii) existing and novel accuracy and efficiency performance metrics, and (iii) selected datasets to allow for comprehensive comparative study. EC-Bench is open-source and provides a framework for researchers to not only compare among existing methods objectively under uniform conditions, but also to introduce and effectively evaluate performance of new methods in a comparative framework. To demonstrate the utility of EC-Bench, we perform extensive experimentation to compare the existing EC number prediction methods and establish their advantages and disadvantages in a variety of prediction tasks, namely “exact EC number prediction,” “EC number completion,” and (partial or additional) “EC number recommendation.” We find wide variation in the performance of different methods, but also subtle but potentially useful differences in the performance of different methods across tasks and for different parts of the EC hierarchy. Availability and implementation: The benchmarking pipeline is available at https://github.com/dsaeedeh/EC-Bench.
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
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.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Evaluating Protein Transfer Learning with TAPE
Rao, R., Bhattacharya, N., Thomas, N., Duan, Y., Chen, X., Canny, J., Abbeel, P., & Song, Y. S. (2019) · doi:10.1101/676825 · Cited by 719 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Davoudi, S., Henry, C. S., Miller, C. S., & Banaei-Kashani, F.
- Affiliations
- Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Colorado Denver , Denver, CO, 80204,
- Argonne National Laboratory (US)
- University of Colorado Denver (US)
- Corresponding author
- Miller, Christopher S
- Venue
- Bioinformatics Advances
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2026
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- vbag004-vbag004
- ISSN
- 2635-0041 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC12889163
- OpenAlex
- W7120165331
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 4.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Bioinformatics Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- US Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research (DE-SC0021350)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- benchmark, protein sequence classification, homology-based prediction, deep learning, contrastive learning, language models, performance indicators
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