LiPP Table 3: RMSD below 2 Angstrom and PoseBusters valid, PoseBusters v2
Success is a predicted small-molecule ligand pose with RMSD below 2 Angstrom and a PoseBusters-valid pose to the experimental pose, as reported in the publication the LiPP authors cite. Pose selection and the RMSD atom set follow that publication and are not stated in this source. Evaluated on PoseBusters v2.
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.
1 recorded evaluation, 1 metric rows. A comparison chart has not yet been validated for these results. The table retains the individual findings and their sources.
Results
Results are available, but no reviewed comparison panel is linked in this release.
All evaluations
1 evaluation · 1 result. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.
Filter evaluations
Applied filters: All linked evaluations
| Tested configuration | Protocol and dataset | Finding | Evidence and details |
|---|---|---|---|
| Configuration: AutoDock Vina (LiPP evaluation) | Protocol: LiPP Table 3: RMSD below 2 Angstrom and PoseBusters valid, PoseBusters v2 Dataset: PoseBusters v2 (308 protein-small molecule complexes) | 58% Success rate (RMSD below 2 Angstrom and PoseBusters valid; PoseBusters v2) percent · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Result quoted from another source · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourceAutoDock Vina on PoseBusters v2 (RMSD below 2 Angstrom and PoseBusters valid) lit-structure-20261011-lipp-protocol-pb-valid-posebusters-v2-308 Aggregation: Not reported The LiPP Benchmark Set for Modeling Lipid–Protein Complexes: Comparison of Co-Folding and Docking Methods · Table 3, row 'AutoDock Vina', column 'PoseBusters v2 (N = 308) % Success Rate' |
Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6.
Methods and evaluation design
Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations
Recorded evaluations
Each evaluation records what was tested and under which conditions.
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.
No execution recipe linked to this protocol. Recipe availability does not establish a completed evaluation.
- paper compilation
- 1
Literature evidence is not a Rewire measurement. Executed but unpublished runs and private review status are not included.
Null control
Proposed control: requires review
Protocol-specific valid geometric or structural control
Protocol-specific applicability, permitted inputs, access, split, evaluator and execution requirements need review before implementation or execution.
This is a suggested selection rule, not a validated method or a measured score.
Conventional reference
Proposed control: requires review
Upstream conventional structural reference with matched templates and cutoffs
Protocol-specific applicability, permitted inputs, access, split, evaluator and execution requirements need review before implementation or execution.
This is a suggested selection rule, not a validated method or a measured score.
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 protocol. 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
1 source record and release history
- The LiPP Benchmark Set for Modeling Lipid–Protein Complexes: Comparison of Co-Folding and Docking Methods · Original source · PMC13292216.1
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: lit-structure-20261011-lipp-protocol-pb-valid-posebusters-v2-308
- areas
- protein-structure; molecular-interactions
- contexts
- research
- protocol
- Success is a predicted small-molecule ligand pose with RMSD below 2 Angstrom and a PoseBusters-valid pose to the experimental pose, as reported in the publication the LiPP authors cite. Pose selection and the RMSD atom set follow that publication and are not stated in this source.
- metric
- success-rate
- metric direction
- higher
- unit
- percent
- success threshold
- criterion: Success is a predicted small-molecule ligand pose with RMSD below 2 Angstrom and a PoseBusters-valid pose to the experimental pose, as reported in the publication the LiPP authors cite. Pose selection and the RMSD atom set follow that publication and are not stated in this source.
- version
- LiPP as published 2026
- source locator
- Table 3, column 'PoseBusters v2 (N = 308) % Success Rate'
- limitations
- The PoseBusters columns are literature values compiled by the LiPP authors, not their own runs.; Per-complex identifiers are in the supplementary data and were not extracted.