rewirebio.iobenchmarks
Source

Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104) · Peer-reviewed

DOI: 10.1186/s13059-025-03575-wOriginal source

What this source contributed

Records in this release that cite this source. A record can cite several sources.

Results

Values as the source printed them. Compare results only under compatible protocols, datasets and metrics.

ValueMetricModel or configurationDatasetEvaluation
20.7727481294708 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
7.053727028 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
0 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
3.50694444444444 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
9.57286560457516 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
6.36989208142997 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
6.64946484588176 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)3Cnet (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)3Cnet: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
77.4918788366578 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
90.69319162 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
65.25670498 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
92.1365208865208 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
89.5024970809849 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
89.2018795078429 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
89.4638656922081 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)AlphaMissense (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphaMissense: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
25.3406122562259 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
33.45524926 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
10.95785441 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
32.2722878972878 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
34.3058374946919 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
33.455249258561 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
34.7025513155192 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)AlphScore (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)AlphScore: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
71.7872363160532 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
57.10064837 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
6 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
56.6324127261627 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
57.4243527961117 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
57.1006483695923 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
58.2494344526282 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)BayesDel_noAF (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel_noAF: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
66.8625108589117 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
56.91613959 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
5.444444444 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
56.7713016150516 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
57.0109930077519 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
56.9161395913335 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
58.1254265161203 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)BayesDel (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BayesDel: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
11.2513715328096 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
14.87319408 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
1.111111111 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
13.7437678062678 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
15.6802443199502 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
14.6755214245133 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
15.5522147291004 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)BLOSUM62 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)BLOSUM62: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
34.98950589 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)CADD_1.6 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.6: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
1.222222222 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against the five top-ranked VEPs (column top_5_winrate; the five are not listed in the table), |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)CADD_1.6 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.6: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets
34.4100401912901 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, direct DMS assays only)CADD_1.6 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.6: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, direct assays only
35.3831510041601 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, indirect DMS assays only)CADD_1.6 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.6: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, indirect assays only
35.0482029805984 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, SNV-accessible substitutions only)CADD_1.6 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.6: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions only
36.9492893241954 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS, SNV-accessible substitutions, missing predictions filled with the VEP's most benign score)CADD_1.6 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.6: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, SNV-accessible substitutions with gaps filled
52.0889425921533 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, per-protein AUROC on shared variants, ClinVar P/LP versus gnomAD v4.1 missense, proteins with at least 10 of each)CADD_1.7 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical set: ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD v4.1 missense (819 proteins)CADD_1.7: Livesey and Marsh 2025 clinical benchmark: pairwise AUROC win rate, ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense
40.31922489 percentPairwise win rate (average pairwise win rate against all other VEPs, |Spearman| with DMS on shared variants, 36 human DMS sets)CADD_1.7 (Livesey and Marsh 2025)Livesey and Marsh 2025 human DMS benchmark set (36 proteins)CADD_1.7: Livesey and Marsh 2025 DMS benchmark: pairwise |Spearman| win rate, all 36 DMS sets

Claims

Statements this source supports, each with where in the source it was checked.

Models, benchmarks and other records

Methods (26)

Configurations (97)

Benchmarks (1)

Protocols (6)

Datasets (2)

Evaluations (570)

Sources (1)

Use cases (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.

26 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
attributes.artifact_sha256
1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.artifact_sha256

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Doi
10.1186/s13059-025-03575-w
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.doi

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Licence
CC BY 4.0
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.licence

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Limitations
2 values
  • Figures 1-4 print no values; per-VEP results come from Supplementary Material 2.
  • The authors obtained predictions for 27 VEPs from dbNSFP 4.2 and the rest from pre-calculated downloads, web servers, local runs or the ProteinGym website (Methods, 'VEPs').
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.limitations

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Media type
application/xml
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.media_type

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Publication status
peer_reviewed
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.publication_status

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Retrieved at
2026-10-14T13:36:01Z
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.retrieved_at

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

attributes.review.artifact_sha256
1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.review.artifact_sha256

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Review: method note
Re-downloaded from the recorded URL on 2026-10-14 and matched the SHA-256; URL, version, licence and limitations checked.
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.review.method_note

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

Review method
2 values
  • source-hash-verification
  • ai-assisted-source-review
Source metadata
Livesey and Marsh 2025, Genome Biology 26:104 (Europe PMC full text XML)

Original source ↗

No field-specific location recorded

Version: PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T13:36:01Z

catalogued

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.review.method

Source artifact SHA-256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2

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

How to read the evidence

Sources and history

Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked

Benchmark of 97 missense variant effect predictors against 36 human deep mutational scanning datasets, and of 83 predictors on ClinVar pathogenic versus gnomAD missense variants.

Release history

No supporting source is linked yet.

Read original source

Download this release (gzip)
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: vep-lit-20261014-source-livesey2025-article

areas
dna-genomes; proteins-complexes
contexts
research; clinical_research
url
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC12016141/fullTextXML
version
PMC12016141 (published 2025-04-22; Genome Biol 26:104)
doi
10.1186/s13059-025-03575-w
retrieved at
2026-10-14T13:36:01Z
artifact sha256
1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2
publication status
peer_reviewed
licence
CC BY 4.0
media type
application/xml
source locator
Results; Methods 'Spearman's correlation and rank score', 'AUROC and AUPRC', 'ClinVar and gnomAD data', 'DMS datasets', 'VEPs'; Tables 1-3; Data availability
limitations
Figures 1-4 print no values; per-VEP results come from Supplementary Material 2.; The authors obtained predictions for 27 VEPs from dbNSFP 4.2 and the rest from pre-calculated downloads, web servers, local runs or the ProteinGym website (Methods, 'VEPs').
review
reviewer: claude; reviewer note: Claude review agent; no human review claimed. Independent Claude (Opus 5.5) review agent, separate from the extraction agent that built this batch. Automated review only. Transcription, not reproduction.; reviewed at: 2026-10-14T15:30:00Z; artifact sha256: 1735ee461ef192d9de67c914e9ad73d72d8aa255ea0e3479eb68cd8631d99fa2; retrieval url: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC12016141/fullTextXML; method: source-hash-verification; ai-assisted-source-review; method note: Re-downloaded from the recorded URL on 2026-10-14 and matched the SHA-256; URL, version, licence and limitations checked.; note: Hash matches.
Related records

    Suggest a correction