These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

199 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21997462)

  • 1. Evaluation of model quality predictions in CASP9.
    Kryshtafovych A; Fidelis K; Tramontano A
    Proteins; 2011; 79 Suppl 10(Suppl 10):91-106. PubMed ID: 21997462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of CASP8 model quality predictions.
    Cozzetto D; Kryshtafovych A; Tramontano A
    Proteins; 2009; 77 Suppl 9():157-66. PubMed ID: 19714774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessment of the assessment: evaluation of the model quality estimates in CASP10.
    Kryshtafovych A; Barbato A; Fidelis K; Monastyrskyy B; Schwede T; Tramontano A
    Proteins; 2014 Feb; 82 Suppl 2(0 2):112-26. PubMed ID: 23780644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of model accuracy estimations in CASP12.
    Kryshtafovych A; Monastyrskyy B; Fidelis K; Schwede T; Tramontano A
    Proteins; 2018 Mar; 86 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):345-360. PubMed ID: 28833563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. United3D: a protein model quality assessment program that uses two consensus based methods.
    Terashi G; Oosawa M; Nakamura Y; Kanou K; Takeda-Shitaka M
    Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo); 2012; 60(11):1359-65. PubMed ID: 23124558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. FunFOLDQA: a quality assessment tool for protein-ligand binding site residue predictions.
    Roche DB; Buenavista MT; McGuffin LJ
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(5):e38219. PubMed ID: 22666491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Improved model quality assessment using ProQ2.
    Ray A; Lindahl E; Wallner B
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2012 Sep; 13():224. PubMed ID: 22963006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methods of model accuracy estimation can help selecting the best models from decoy sets: Assessment of model accuracy estimations in CASP11.
    Kryshtafovych A; Barbato A; Monastyrskyy B; Fidelis K; Schwede T; Tramontano A
    Proteins; 2016 Sep; 84 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):349-69. PubMed ID: 26344049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessment of template based protein structure predictions in CASP9.
    Mariani V; Kiefer F; Schmidt T; Haas J; Schwede T
    Proteins; 2011; 79 Suppl 10():37-58. PubMed ID: 22002823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessment of predictions in the model quality assessment category.
    Cozzetto D; Kryshtafovych A; Ceriani M; Tramontano A
    Proteins; 2007; 69 Suppl 8():175-83. PubMed ID: 17680695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of the assessment-All about complexes.
    Studer G; Tauriello G; Schwede T
    Proteins; 2023 Dec; 91(12):1850-1860. PubMed ID: 37858934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A further leap of improvement in tertiary structure prediction in CASP13 prompts new routes for future assessments.
    Abriata LA; Tamò GE; Dal Peraro M
    Proteins; 2019 Dec; 87(12):1100-1112. PubMed ID: 31344267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessment of protein model structure accuracy estimation in CASP13: Challenges in the era of deep learning.
    Won J; Baek M; Monastyrskyy B; Kryshtafovych A; Seok C
    Proteins; 2019 Dec; 87(12):1351-1360. PubMed ID: 31436360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Methods for estimation of model accuracy in CASP12.
    Elofsson A; Joo K; Keasar C; Lee J; Maghrabi AHA; Manavalan B; McGuffin LJ; Ménendez Hurtado D; Mirabello C; Pilstål R; Sidi T; Uziela K; Wallner B
    Proteins; 2018 Mar; 86 Suppl 1():361-373. PubMed ID: 28975666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. QMEANclust: estimation of protein model quality by combining a composite scoring function with structural density information.
    Benkert P; Schwede T; Tosatto SC
    BMC Struct Biol; 2009 May; 9():35. PubMed ID: 19457232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of disorder predictions in CASP9.
    Monastyrskyy B; Fidelis K; Moult J; Tramontano A; Kryshtafovych A
    Proteins; 2011; 79 Suppl 10(S10):107-18. PubMed ID: 21928402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Introducing "best single template" models as reference baseline for the Continuous Automated Model Evaluation (CAMEO).
    Haas J; Gumienny R; Barbato A; Ackermann F; Tauriello G; Bertoni M; Studer G; Smolinski A; Schwede T
    Proteins; 2019 Dec; 87(12):1378-1387. PubMed ID: 31571280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An automatic method for CASP9 free modeling structure prediction assessment.
    Cong Q; Kinch LN; Pei J; Shi S; Grishin VN; Li W; Grishin NV
    Bioinformatics; 2011 Dec; 27(24):3371-8. PubMed ID: 21994223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of predictions in the CASP10 model refinement category.
    Nugent T; Cozzetto D; Jones DT
    Proteins; 2014 Feb; 82 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):98-111. PubMed ID: 23900810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Automated tertiary structure prediction with accurate local model quality assessment using the IntFOLD-TS method.
    McGuffin LJ; Roche DB
    Proteins; 2011; 79 Suppl 10():137-46. PubMed ID: 22069035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.