rewire.itbenchmarks
Protocol

ClusPro BM5 difficult aggregate top30

Printed Table1 bottom-row target success rates; includes all target types.

1 evaluation · 1 result

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.

View coverage and remaining gaps across all benchmarks

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

Exact evaluated configurations and original reported results
Tested configurationProtocol and datasetFindingEvidence and details
Configuration: ClusPro BM5 Table1 category-routingProtocol: ClusPro BM5 difficult aggregate top30
Dataset subset: BM5 evaluated difficult cohort
26.5% success_at_30
percent · higher

Uncertainty: type: unreported

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Author-reported evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

ClusPro BM5 difficult top30

Not reported

Aggregation: Not reported

Performance and its limits in rigid body protein-protein docking · Table1 bottom % Good predictions, difficult column, second/top30 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

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-09-30-e37e3ab1284d
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Relationship: part of
ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-benchmark
Individual claims
Performance and its limits in rigid body protein-protein docking

Original source ↗

Table1 bottom rows

Version: Structure 28(9):1071–1081.e3; 2020; PMC author manuscript NIHMS1608597
Retrieved: 2026-09-30T21:50:23.483497+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-30T21:50:23.483497+00:00

Audit details

Source transcription only; not execution, human scientific review or independent reproduction.

Field: links:part_of:ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-benchmark

Claim: ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-claim-protocol-total-difficult-top30

Source artifact SHA-256: 1c02bd7c53eb0e5d5c243b5e6da23168eb20bcc32ab970719666a5838fd58443

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Sources and history

View linked audit checks and correction history

Release 2026-09-30-e37e3ab1284d · Record review: source checked

1 source records and release historyDownload this release
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: ucc-docking-cluspro-bm5-2020-protocol-total-difficult-top30

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
30
Related records

Suggest a correction