Per-method hit rates cannot be read from the Adaptyv round 2 data
Per method aggregation not stated of Adaptyv EGFR competition round 2 tested designs
results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 has 402 data rows and the columns username, name, kd, binding_strength, binding, expression, sequence, dna, pae_interaction, esm_pll, iptm, plddt, similarity_check and design_models. The paper states 400 designs were tested in round 2, so the row count does not match. design_models is the entrant's own free-text declaration (for example '["Custom PLM"]'); Section 4.2 states the organisers 'manually curated and categorized' entrants' workflow summaries into five design choices, so method identity is self-declared and then curated. Neither the README's Methods section nor the preprint states how to aggregate these rows into a per-method or per-category rate, and Section 4.1 reports Figure 8's binder counts 'across the 3 binding thresholds' without defining them. Under docs/collection.md a value may be computed from a source's own rows only where the source states the aggregation, so the per-method rates in Figures 3, 8 and 9 and the 60 affinities in Figure 10 remain unextracted.
The round 2 repository publishes one row per tested design with a binding flag, an affinity and the entrant's declared design models, but neither the repository nor the preprint states an aggregation over those rows, the method labels are free text, and the three binding thresholds behind the figure counts are never defined. No per-method rate is computed from this file.
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.
12 evidence rows matching the loaded filters
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|---|---|
| Claimed field per_method_aggregation_not_stated Context-only references | Crowdsourced Protein Design: Lessons From the Adaptyv EGFR Binder Competition (Cotet et al., bioRxiv 2025) results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: bioRxiv preprint version 1 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Source has a recorded evidence concern. Consult its source page before using the claim. Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: SHA-256 of one retrieval of a mutable web page. The hash describes that retrieval, not a stable artifact. |
| Claimed field per_method_aggregation_not_stated Context-only references | Adaptyv EGFR design competition round 2 results repository results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record Archive member: results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 |
| Source location results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Context-only references | Crowdsourced Protein Design: Lessons From the Adaptyv EGFR Binder Competition (Cotet et al., bioRxiv 2025) results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: bioRxiv preprint version 1 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Source has a recorded evidence concern. Consult its source page before using the claim. Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: SHA-256 of one retrieval of a mutable web page. The hash describes that retrieval, not a stable artifact. |
| Source location results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Context-only references | Adaptyv EGFR design competition round 2 results repository results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record Archive member: results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 |
| Claimed value results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 has 402 data rows and the columns username, name, kd, binding_strength, binding, expression, sequence, dna, pae_interaction, esm_pll, iptm, plddt, similarity_check and design_models. The paper states 400 designs were tested in round 2, so the row count does not match. design_models is the entrant's own free-text declaration (for example '["Custom PLM"]'); Section 4.2 states the organisers 'manually curated and categorized' entrants' workflow summaries into five design choices, so method identity is self-declared and then curated. Neither the README's Methods section nor the preprint states how to aggregate these rows into a per-method or per-category rate, and Section 4.1 reports Figure 8's binder counts 'across the 3 binding thresholds' without defining them. Under docs/collection.md a value may be computed from a source's own rows only where the source states the aggregation, so the per-method rates in Figures 3, 8 and 9 and the 60 affinities in Figure 10 remain unextracted. Context-only references | Crowdsourced Protein Design: Lessons From the Adaptyv EGFR Binder Competition (Cotet et al., bioRxiv 2025) results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: bioRxiv preprint version 1 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Source has a recorded evidence concern. Consult its source page before using the claim. Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: SHA-256 of one retrieval of a mutable web page. The hash describes that retrieval, not a stable artifact. |
| Claimed value results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 has 402 data rows and the columns username, name, kd, binding_strength, binding, expression, sequence, dna, pae_interaction, esm_pll, iptm, plddt, similarity_check and design_models. The paper states 400 designs were tested in round 2, so the row count does not match. design_models is the entrant's own free-text declaration (for example '["Custom PLM"]'); Section 4.2 states the organisers 'manually curated and categorized' entrants' workflow summaries into five design choices, so method identity is self-declared and then curated. Neither the README's Methods section nor the preprint states how to aggregate these rows into a per-method or per-category rate, and Section 4.1 reports Figure 8's binder counts 'across the 3 binding thresholds' without defining them. Under docs/collection.md a value may be computed from a source's own rows only where the source states the aggregation, so the per-method rates in Figures 3, 8 and 9 and the 60 affinities in Figure 10 remain unextracted. Context-only references | Adaptyv EGFR design competition round 2 results repository results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record Archive member: results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 |
| Description The round 2 repository publishes one row per tested design with a binding flag, an affinity and the entrant's declared design models, but neither the repository nor the preprint states an aggregation over those rows, the method labels are free text, and the three binding thresholds behind the figure counts are never defined. No per-method rate is computed from this file. Context-only references | Crowdsourced Protein Design: Lessons From the Adaptyv EGFR Binder Competition (Cotet et al., bioRxiv 2025) results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: bioRxiv preprint version 1 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Source has a recorded evidence concern. Consult its source page before using the claim. Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: SHA-256 of one retrieval of a mutable web page. The hash describes that retrieval, not a stable artifact. |
| Description The round 2 repository publishes one row per tested design with a binding flag, an affinity and the entrant's declared design models, but neither the repository nor the preprint states an aggregation over those rows, the method labels are free text, and the three binding thresholds behind the figure counts are never defined. No per-method rate is computed from this file. Context-only references | Adaptyv EGFR design competition round 2 results repository results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record Archive member: results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 |
| Relationship: subject uc-binder-20261022-data-adaptyv-egfr-r2 Context-only references | Crowdsourced Protein Design: Lessons From the Adaptyv EGFR Binder Competition (Cotet et al., bioRxiv 2025) results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: bioRxiv preprint version 1 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Source has a recorded evidence concern. Consult its source page before using the claim. Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: SHA-256 of one retrieval of a mutable web page. The hash describes that retrieval, not a stable artifact. |
| Relationship: subject uc-binder-20261022-data-adaptyv-egfr-r2 Context-only references | Adaptyv EGFR design competition round 2 results repository results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation. Version: commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 | not individually reviewed No individual claim review recorded Audit detailsField: Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record Archive member: results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 |
Sources and history
Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked
2 source records and release history
- Adaptyv EGFR design competition round 2 results repository · Original source · commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0
- Crowdsourced Protein Design: Lessons From the Adaptyv EGFR Binder Competition (Cotet et al., bioRxiv 2025) · Original source · bioRxiv preprint version 1
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: uc-binder-20261022-claim-adaptyv-per-method-rates-not-extractable
- field
- per_method_aggregation_not_stated
- review
- artifact sha256: b98dd231fa663e10e2768ad0cb7c8b33ba993bc809bd6168390ac87120ce3b7b; method: source-hash-verification; independent-cell-check; ai-assisted-source-review; method note: Re-downloaded at the pinned commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 and the SHA-256 recomputed and matched. Reparsed independently: 402 data rows and the 14 stated columns.; note: Reviewed in docs/reviews/use-cases/binder-2026-10-22.md. Automated AI review of the source transcription only; it is not human scientific review and nothing here was reproduced experimentally.; retrieval url: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/adaptyvbio/egfr_competition_2/fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0/results/result_summary.csv; reviewed at: 2026-10-22T15:00:00Z; reviewer: claude; reviewer note: Claude review agent, independent of the extraction agent; no human review claimed
- source locator
- results/result_summary.csv header and row count; README.md 'Methods' and 'Data analysis'; preprint Sections 4.1 and 4.2
- value
- results/result_summary.csv at commit fc91b91ddc367830b755b215dbc69669675ad6a0 has 402 data rows and the columns username, name, kd, binding_strength, binding, expression, sequence, dna, pae_interaction, esm_pll, iptm, plddt, similarity_check and design_models. The paper states 400 designs were tested in round 2, so the row count does not match. design_models is the entrant's own free-text declaration (for example '["Custom PLM"]'); Section 4.2 states the organisers 'manually curated and categorized' entrants' workflow summaries into five design choices, so method identity is self-declared and then curated. Neither the README's Methods section nor the preprint states how to aggregate these rows into a per-method or per-category rate, and Section 4.1 reports Figure 8's binder counts 'across the 3 binding thresholds' without defining them. Under docs/collection.md a value may be computed from a source's own rows only where the source states the aggregation, so the per-method rates in Figures 3, 8 and 9 and the 60 affinities in Figure 10 remain unextracted.