ClusPro BM5 difficult aggregate top10
Printed Table1 bottom-row target success rates; includes all target types.
Overview
Printed Table1 bottom-row target success rates; includes all target types.
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: ClusPro BM5 Table1 category-routing | Protocol: ClusPro BM5 difficult aggregate top10 Dataset subset: BM5 evaluated difficult cohort | 17.6% success_at_10 percent · higher Uncertainty: type: unreported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourceNot reported Aggregation: Not reported Performance and its limits in rigid body protein-protein docking · Table1 bottom % Good predictions, difficult column, first/top10 row |
Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-09-30-e37e3ab1284d.
Methods and evaluation design
Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations
Evaluation design
Benchmarks bring together tasks and protocols. A task describes the biological question; a protocol defines a particular test.
These source-backed links do not make different protocols or scores interchangeable.
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.
- Author-reported evaluations
- 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 Executed but unpublished runs and private review status are not included.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
Select a task-valid null control after reviewing inputs and metric
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
Select an upstream conventional reference after reviewing the full protocol
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 · Model evaluation matrix · Source table · Release and checksums
Coverage is derived from release 2026-09-30-e37e3ab1284d. 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.
1 evidence row matching the loaded filters
| Property and statement | Original source and location | Review and provenance |
|---|---|---|
| Relationship: part of ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-benchmark Individual claims | Performance and its limits in rigid body protein-protein docking Table1 bottom rows Version: Structure 28(9):1071–1081.e3; 2020; PMC author manuscript NIHMS1608597 | source checked automated source review · 2026-09-30T21:50:23.483497+00:00 Audit detailsSource transcription only; not execution, human scientific review or independent reproduction. Field: Claim: ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-claim-protocol-total-difficult-top10 Source artifact SHA-256: Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record |
Sources and history
View linked audit checks and correction history
Release 2026-09-30-e37e3ab1284d · Record review: source checked
1 source records and release history
- Performance and its limits in rigid body protein-protein docking · Original source · Structure 28(9):1071–1081.e3; 2020; PMC author manuscript NIHMS1608597
Technical metadata and extraction receipts
Stable ID: ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-protocol-total-difficult-top10
- areas
- proteins-complexes
- source locator
- Table1 bottom % Good predictions rows
- review
- method: automated_source_review; reviewed at: 2026-09-30T21:50:23.483497+00:00; date: 2026-09-30; reviewer: Codex primary-source table extraction; note: Source transcription only; not execution, human scientific review or independent reproduction.
- capacity
- 10