CASP16 binding affinity challenge
Blind challenge in which participants submit predicted binding affinities for undisclosed pharmaceutical ligand series, scored after the experimental values are released.
Results are recorded on the linked protocols, tasks or configurations listed below. Their settings and evaluations are kept separate.
Overview
An explanatory profile has not yet been reviewed for this record.
Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.
Results on linked records
This benchmark has no results of its own in this release. One linked record has results. They are not assigned to the underlying benchmark: each record keeps its own settings and evaluations, and its scores are on its own page.
- CASP16 affinity challenge, Boltz-2 against the top-ranked participants Protocol · part of this benchmark · 10 evaluations · 90 results
Methods and evaluation design
Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations
Baseline coverage
Reference methods help show what a model adds beyond simple controls. We track a null control and a conventional method for each protocol.
0 of 2 active baseline roles have published Rewire measurements in this release. Measurements on a selected protocol do not establish coverage of an entire suite.
Baseline status by linked protocol
- CASP16 affinity challenge, Boltz-2 against the top-ranked participants · 0/2 roles measured
Protocol coverage CSV (gzip) · Model evaluation matrix (gzip) · Source table (gzip) · Release and checksums (gzip)
Coverage is derived from release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6. Source citations describe the original records; they do not validate an unreviewed baseline proposal. No results have been generated by this audit.
Run instructions
No runnable recipe has been reviewed for this benchmark. Dataset access, model requirements, licences and compute requirements must be checked against its sources before execution.
Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions
Evidence
Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.
Evidence table
Inspect claims, sources and review details
Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.
One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.
0 evidence rows matching the loaded filters
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|
No evidence rows match these filters. Choose another scope or clear the search.
Sources and history
Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked
2 source records and release history
- Boltz-2: Towards Accurate and Efficient Binding Affinity Prediction, supplementary appendix · Original source · bioRxiv v1 posted 2025-06-18; supplement PDF as deposited in Europe PMC PMC12262699 (PPR1038344)
- Assessment of protein-ligand pose and affinity predictions in CASP16 · Original source · Proteins, cover date January 2026; Europe PMC full-text XML snapshot PMC12750038
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: uc-leadopt-20261022-benchmark-casp16-affinity
- areas
- molecular-interactions
- contexts
- research
- entity level
- challenge
- version
- CASP16 (2024 round), protein-ligand affinity track
- task
- Blind ranking of ligand series by measured affinity
- scope note
- Boltz-2 supplement Table 14 extracted in full. The CASP16 assessors' per-group Kendall tau values are figure-only and were not extracted; the assessors' stated achievable ceiling and maximum observed tau are recorded as claims.
- source locator
- Boltz-2 supplement Table 14; Gilson et al. 2026 Sections 2.3, 3.3.1 and Table 1
- review
- method: source-hash-verification; pdf-text-parse; independent-cell-check; rendered-source-visual-check; ai-assisted-source-review; method note: Re-retrieved all three sources and matched each pinned SHA-256. Re-rendered the Boltz-2 supplement with pdftotext -layout (poppler 26.08.0) and matched the text layer's recorded SHA-256. Re-read all 256 cells with a parser written for this review that does not import the extraction script, matching each result to its cell through its own source_locator, and separately read appendix tables 11, 12 and 14 from PNG renderings of PDF pages 29 and 30 at 160 dpi, and Ross Table 3 from the pinned XML markup. Checked printed value, numeric value, locator, metric concept, qualifier, direction, unit, uncertainty and the linked configuration, protocol and dataset, and that every N/A or '-' cell is recorded as missing with a reason.; reviewer: claude; reviewer note: Claude review agent, independent of the extraction agent; no human review claimed; reviewed at: 2026-10-22T13:40:00Z; artifact sha256: be867a5d92add8b223d47d882a4213ad489741f3e4d5081a0901a54370342569; retrieval url: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC12262699/supplementaryFiles
Related records
- subject: Estimated achievable ranking accuracy under assay error
- subject: Achievable ranking accuracy under a larger assumed assay error
- subject: Per-target achievable ranking accuracy under assay error
- subject: Maximum affinity-ranking accuracy reached in CASP16
- subject: CASP16 affinity accuracy is no better than the earlier D3R challenges
- subject: Supplying experimental structures did not improve affinity accuracy
- part of: CASP16 affinity challenge, Boltz-2 against the top-ranked participants