hitdisc-20261022-use-case-mapping-cache3-merged-library: WF1696 wording corrected to the source's own
Rationale of Relevance of hitdisc-20261022-protocol-cache3-merged-library to use-case-hit-discovery-virtual-screening
Direct, and the closest thing in this batch to the use case's question asked cleanly: every workflow ranked the same 1,739 compounds, all of which had been assayed, so the library is held constant and only the ranking differs. The article's own reading is that WF1696, a purely physics-based workflow, retrieved did better than any other method in retrieving hits from the collection of all molecules selected in Round 1; in table S8 it predicted 99 compounds active and captured 2 of the 4 Tier 1 and 9 of the 25 Tier 2 confirmed hits.
'Significantly more hits than any other' is what the article says of WF1715's own-selection aggregated score. Of WF1696 it says it 'did better than any other method in retrieving hits from the collection of all molecules selected in Round 1'.
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.
7 evidence rows matching the loaded filters
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|---|---|
| Claimed field attributes.rationale Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Previous value Direct, and the closest thing in this batch to the use case's question asked cleanly: every workflow ranked the same 1,739 compounds, all of which had been assayed, so the library is held constant and only the ranking differs. The article's own reading is that WF1696, a purely physics-based workflow, retrieved significantly more hits than any other; in table S8 it predicted 99 compounds active and captured 2 of the 4 Tier 1 and 9 of the 25 Tier 2 confirmed hits. Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Source location Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Claimed value Direct, and the closest thing in this batch to the use case's question asked cleanly: every workflow ranked the same 1,739 compounds, all of which had been assayed, so the library is held constant and only the ranking differs. The article's own reading is that WF1696, a purely physics-based workflow, retrieved did better than any other method in retrieving hits from the collection of all molecules selected in Round 1; in table S8 it predicted 99 compounds active and captured 2 of the 4 Tier 1 and 9 of the 25 Tier 2 confirmed hits. Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Description 'Significantly more hits than any other' is what the article says of WF1715's own-selection aggregated score. Of WF1696 it says it 'did better than any other method in retrieving hits from the collection of all molecules selected in Round 1'. Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Relationship: subject hitdisc-20261022-use-case-mapping-cache3-merged-library Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
| Name hitdisc-20261022-use-case-mapping-cache3-merged-library: WF1696 wording corrected to the source's own Context-only references | Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows' Version: PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21) | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
Sources and history
Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked
1 source record and release history
- Herasymenko et al. 2026, J Chem Inf Model (CACHE Challenge #3, Europe PMC full text) · Original source · PMC12892310 (J Chem Inf Model, published 2026-01-21)
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: metadata-correction-4cd597ff4669913a3b12
- areas
- molecular-interactions
- contexts
- research
- field
- attributes.rationale
- previous value
- Direct, and the closest thing in this batch to the use case's question asked cleanly: every workflow ranked the same 1,739 compounds, all of which had been assayed, so the library is held constant and only the ranking differs. The article's own reading is that WF1696, a purely physics-based workflow, retrieved significantly more hits than any other; in table S8 it predicted 99 compounds active and captured 2 of the 4 Tier 1 and 9 of the 25 Tier 2 confirmed hits.
- value
- Direct, and the closest thing in this batch to the use case's question asked cleanly: every workflow ranked the same 1,739 compounds, all of which had been assayed, so the library is held constant and only the ranking differs. The article's own reading is that WF1696, a purely physics-based workflow, retrieved did better than any other method in retrieving hits from the collection of all molecules selected in Round 1; in table S8 it predicted 99 compounds active and captured 2 of the 4 Tier 1 and 9 of the 25 Tier 2 confirmed hits.
- source locator
- Herasymenko et al. 2026, Results 'Trends and Strategies from the Best Performing Computational Workflows'
- review
- method: scope-review; independent-cell-check; reviewer: claude; reviewer note: Claude review agent, independent of the extraction agent; no human review claimed; date: 2026-10-22; method note: Read both sentences in the pinned article: 'significantly more hits' belongs to WF1715 and Figure 6b, not to WF1696.; note: Correction found by the independent review pass of batch use-case-coverage-hitdisc-20261022. The previous value is kept here.; receipt: data/omics/use-case-coverage-hitdisc-20261022/review.json