rewire.itbenchmarks
Task

Protein–ligand virtual screening

Virtual screening evaluates enrichment when candidate ligands are ranked using the paper’s docking/scoring workflow.

SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

2 evaluations · 2 results

Overview

Datasets

LIT-PCBA is the virtual-screening collection; CASF and MerckFEP are separate scoring evaluations.

Metrics

Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.

Allowed inputs

Ligands, target proteins and docking/scoring outputs.

SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
Evaluation procedure diagram
How it worksComputational evaluation flow
Computational evaluation flow1. Input: Ligands, target proteins and docking/scoring outputs.. Then: 2. Evaluation: DiffDock pose generation combined with NMDN scoring; the screen is separate from CASF affinity evaluation.. Then: 3. Readout: Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.Computational evaluation flow1. Input: Ligands, target proteins and docking/scoring outputs.. Then: 2. Evaluation: DiffDock pose generation combined with NMDN scoring; the screen is separate from CASF affinity evaluation.. Then: 3. Readout: Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.Computational evaluation flow1. Input: Ligands, target proteins and docking/scoring outputs.. Then: 2. Evaluation: DiffDock pose generation combined with NMDN scoring; the screen is separate from CASF affinity evaluation.. Then: 3. Readout: Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.

Conceptual summary of the cited evaluation; exact task configuration and source version remain part of the protocol.

SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

limited source coverage · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. All specifications and missing details

Results

Results are available, but no reviewed comparison panel is linked in this release.

All evaluations

2 evaluations · 2 results. 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
Pipeline: DiffDock-NMDNTask: Protein–ligand virtual screening
Dataset: CASF-2016 blind docked poses
66.7 Forward-screening success rate
% · unknown

Uncertainty: Not reported

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

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

DiffDock-NMDN: Protein–ligand virtual screening

NMDN scoring on DiffDock-NMDN blind docked poses; not ligand-pose RMSD.

Aggregation: Not reported

Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Table 2, DiffDock-NMDN / NMDN row, success rate (%) column
Configuration: VinaTask: Protein–ligand virtual screening
Dataset: CASF-2016 blind docked poses
42.1 Forward-screening success rate
% · unknown

Uncertainty: Not reported

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Independent external evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

Vina: Protein–ligand virtual screening

Vina scoring on the same DiffDock-NMDN blind docked poses; not ligand-pose RMSD.

Aggregation: Not reported

Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Table 2, Vina scoring row, success rate (%) column

Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220.

Methods and evaluation design

Procedure, tasks and evaluated configurations

How it works

Evaluation methodology

LIT-PCBA is the virtual-screening collection; CASF and MerckFEP are separate scoring evaluations. Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation. DiffDock combined with NMDN scoring is the assessed workflow.

SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Recorded evaluations

Each evaluation records what was tested and under which conditions.

Run instructions

No runnable recipe has been reviewed for this task. Dataset access, model requirements, licences and compute requirements must be checked against its sources before execution.

A task describes a biological question. Choose a linked protocol to obtain concrete split and scoring instructions.

Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions

Strengths and limitations

Strengths and considerations

No source-reviewed explanatory claims are recorded here yet.

Profile review details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Stable record: reported-task-a7803ecf7708cc

Specifications

Inputs, training, access and other details

Explanatory profile: limited source coverage · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. Review applies to the cited claims; unresolved fields are listed below. Numerical results retain their own review status.

Data, procedure and scoring
PropertyDescription and evidence
DatasetsLIT-PCBA is the virtual-screening collection; CASF and MerckFEP are separate scoring evaluations.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
SplitsModels are fitted on the first RTMScore random PDBbind training/validation allocation. LIT-PCBA is a separate external screening collection, evaluated target by target; its compounds are not partitioned into a new supervised screening training set in the described experiment.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · §4.1.1 Binder Data Set; LIT-PCBA screening description and Table 4
MetricsTop-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
BaselinesDiffDock combined with NMDN scoring is the assessed workflow.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
Leakage controlsThe binder-training filters remove PDB entries in the test sets. The weak-binder collection is reported to have no overlap with the adopted benchmarks. LIT-PCBA pose generation and scoring do not use known binder information for the evaluated target; the paper does not claim a universal protein-family or scaffold-disjoint test.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · §4.1.1–4.1.2 including list items omitted from paragraph-only cache; LIT-PCBA screening discussion before Table 4
UncertaintyThe LIT-PCBA table reports per-target enrichment factors, an across-target average and counts above enrichment thresholds. It does not report confidence intervals or repeated-run dispersion for these screening estimates; sampling variability reported for the PDBbind docking experiment is a different endpoint. · Not reported in inspected sources
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · LIT-PCBA screening results, Table 4 and its footnotes; contrast Table 1
Entity typePaper-specific computational evaluation protocol.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
OrganismsThe LIT-PCBA table identifies molecular targets, with many activity labels derived from cell-based phenotypic assays. The screening description and target table do not give a per-assay organism or cell-line inventory; target identity alone does not establish assay provenance. · Not reported in inspected sources
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · LIT-PCBA screening description, Table 4 and reference to Table S6
AssaysActive/inactive compound screening labels.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
Allowed inputsLigands, target proteins and docking/scoring outputs.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147
AdaptationDiffDock pose generation combined with NMDN scoring; the screen is separate from CASF affinity evaluation.
SourcesNormalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening · Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Evidence

Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.

Papers and result coverage

Last literature check: 2026-09-17. Primary-paper discovery and source inspection. Source-checked results are not independently reproduced experiments.

Paper or primary resourceVersionReference
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screeningversion of recordRead source
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.4c01014
Historical gaps recorded on 2026-09-17

The catalogue now holds 2 result rows for this benchmark. A note below about pending extraction describes the state on 2026-09-17 and may since have been answered by a later batch. The result rows and their sources are the current record.

  • Target-level EF, mean EF and counts above EF cutoffs are separate metrics.
  • Do not describe pKd-score or pKd-screen as experimentally calibrated affinity from the EF metric.
  • All table scores are conditional on the stated docked poses.
Search and extraction details

primary comparison table screened

Searches

  • "PMC11815853"

Evidence locations

  • Table 4 caption and footnotes
  • Results: virtual screening

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.

17 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Diagram caption
Conceptual summary of the cited evaluation; exact task configuration and source version remain part of the protocol.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.caption

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Diagram steps
  • Input: Ligands, target proteins and docking/scoring outputs.
  • Evaluation: DiffDock pose generation combined with NMDN scoring; the screen is separate from CASF affinity evaluation.
  • Readout: Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.steps

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Diagram title
Computational evaluation flow
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.title

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Datasets
LIT-PCBA is the virtual-screening collection; CASF and MerckFEP are separate scoring evaluations.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.0.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Splits
Models are fitted on the first RTMScore random PDBbind training/validation allocation. LIT-PCBA is a separate external screening collection, evaluated target by target; its compounds are not partitioned into a new supervised screening training set in the described experiment.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

§4.1.1 Binder Data Set; LIT-PCBA screening description and Table 4

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.1.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Adaptation
DiffDock pose generation combined with NMDN scoring; the screen is separate from CASF affinity evaluation.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.10.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Metrics
Top-one-percent enrichment factor, summarized across the virtual-screening evaluation.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.2.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Baselines
DiffDock combined with NMDN scoring is the assessed workflow.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.3.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Leakage controls
The binder-training filters remove PDB entries in the test sets. The weak-binder collection is reported to have no overlap with the adopted benchmarks. LIT-PCBA pose generation and scoring do not use known binder information for the evaluated target; the paper does not claim a universal protein-family or scaffold-disjoint test.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

§4.1.1–4.1.2 including list items omitted from paragraph-only cache; LIT-PCBA screening discussion before Table 4

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.4.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Uncertainty
The LIT-PCBA table reports per-target enrichment factors, an across-target average and counts above enrichment thresholds. It does not report confidence intervals or repeated-run dispersion for these screening estimates; sampling variability reported for the PDBbind docking experiment is a different endpoint.
Individual claims
Normalized Protein–Ligand Distance Likelihood Score for End-to-End Blind Docking and Virtual Screening

Original source ↗

LIT-PCBA screening results, Table 4 and its footnotes; contrast Table 1

Version: version of record
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.552697+00:00

unreported

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Relevant full-paper computational evaluation sections, tables/captions and cited supplementary task passages were reviewed. Reporting omissions are scoped to the inspected sources. Original numerical results are unchanged.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.5.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 194b21478aaedd9a7384cabb8b0040ca5b6a4938f4d275627b86a6b787affc20

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

Inspected artifact

Sources and history

View linked audit checks and correction history

Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220 · Record review: needs review

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

Stable ID: reported-task-a7803ecf7708cc

areas
molecular-interactions
tasks
Protein–ligand virtual screening
entity level
task
version
Not reported
task
Protein–ligand virtual screening
scope note
Paper-specific evaluation task; protocol completeness requires further extraction.
benchmark research
review date: 2026-09-17; status: primary_comparison_table_screened; primary sources: expansion-p3-nmdn-2025; inspected locators: Table 4 caption and footnotes; Results: virtual screening; searched queries: "PMC11815853"; gaps: Target-level EF, mean EF and counts above EF cutoffs are separate metrics.; Do not describe pKd-score or pKd-screen as experimentally calibrated affinity from the EF metric.; All table scores are conditional on the stated docked poses.; claim scope: Primary-paper discovery and source inspection. Source-checked results are not independently reproduced experiments.
historical missing metadata
protocol version: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; split: not_reported_in_legacy_extract
metadata review scope
historical_missing_metadata preserves the original discovery state. Current descriptive evidence and missingness are recorded in profile.facts; numerical-result review is separate.
legacy kinds
benchmark
entity classification
review date: 2026-09-17; rationale: This source-scoped record identifies the biological prediction task and holds its paper context. Preserve the existing task identity; exact split, model adaptation and scoring remain in linked evaluations or separate protocol records.; source ids: nmdn-2025; source locator: Results/Conclusion: virtual screening; cached text lines 97–110, 147; ambiguities: A paper- or suite-specific task may constrain some inputs or metrics; that alone does not make it interchangeable with a complete versioned protocol. No protocol equivalence is inferred.; Some legacy profile Entity type facts use the generic phrase computational evaluation protocol. That boilerplate is not sufficient to establish a single fixed protocol identity or to merge this task with another protocol record.
Related records

Suggest a correction