Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 1, 2026

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke
Published on: January 7, 2019
Comparative assessment of scoring functions on an updated benchmark: 1. Compilation of the test set
1State Key Laboratory of Bioorganic and Natural Products Chemistry, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences , 345 Lingling Road, Shanghai 200032, People's Republic of China.
Abstract:
Scoring functions are often applied in combination with molecular docking methods to predict ligand binding poses and ligand binding affinities or to identify active compounds through virtual screening. An objective benchmark for assessing the performance of current scoring functions is expected to provide practical guidance for the users to make smart choices among available methods. It can also elucidate the common weakness in current methods for future improvements. The primary goal of our comparative assessment of scoring functions (CASF) project is to provide a high-standard, publicly accessible benchmark of this type. Our latest study, i.e., CASF-2013, evaluated 20 popular scoring functions on an updated set of protein-ligand complexes. This data set was selected out of 8302 protein-ligand complexes recorded in the PDBbind database (version 2013) through a fairly complicated process. Sample selection was made by considering the quality of complex structures as well as binding data. Finally, qualified complexes were clustered by 90% similarity in protein sequences. Three representative complexes were chosen from each cluster to control sample redundancy. The final outcome, namely, the PDBbind core set (version 2013), consists of 195 protein-ligand complexes in 65 clusters with binding constants spanning nearly 10 orders of magnitude. In this data set, 82% of the ligand molecules are "druglike" and 78% of the protein molecules are validated or potential drug targets. Correlation between binding constants and several key properties of ligands are discussed. Methods and results of the scoring function evaluation will be described in a companion work in this issue (doi: 10.1021/ci500081m ).
Related Concept Videos
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Compacting Factor test
The procedure begins by placing concrete into the upper hopper without any compaction. Once filled, the bottom door of this hopper is opened,...
Bonferroni Test
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test
Reliability and Validity
Review and Preview
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
