4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Decoy Database Improvement for Protein Folding

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
卷 22, 期 9, 页码 823-836

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/cmb.2015.0116

关键词

decoy databases; protein folding; sampling methods

资金

  1. NSF [CRI-0551685, CCF-0833199, CCF-0830753, IIS-096053, IIS-0917266]
  2. THECB NHARP [000512-0097-2009]
  3. Chevron
  4. IBM
  5. Intel
  6. Oracle/Sun
  7. King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) [KUS-C1-016-04]
  8. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  9. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations [1423111] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  10. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  11. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems [0916053] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  12. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr
  13. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems [1217991] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  14. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations
  15. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [0833199] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Predicting protein structures and simulating protein folding are two of the most important problems in computational biology today. Simulation methods rely on a scoring function to distinguish the native structure (the most energetically stable) from non-native structures. Decoy databases are collections of non-native structures used to test and verify these functions. We present a method to evaluate and improve the quality of decoy databases by adding novel structures and removing redundant structures. We test our approach on 20 different decoy databases of varying size and type and show significant improvement across a variety of metrics. We also test our improved databases on two popular modern scoring functions and show that for most cases they contain a greater or equal number of native-like structures than the original databases, thereby producing a more rigorous database for testing scoring functions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据