Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

PDB-Struct: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Structure-based Protein Design

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2312.00080 v1 pith:B6RD3BHH submitted 2023-11-30 q-bio.QM cs.LG

PDB-Struct: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Structure-based Protein Design

classification q-bio.QM cs.LG
keywords proteinbenchmarkdesignmethodsmetricpdb-structcomprehensiveevaluation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Structure-based protein design has attracted increasing interest, with numerous methods being introduced in recent years. However, a universally accepted method for evaluation has not been established, since the wet-lab validation can be overly time-consuming for the development of new algorithms, and the $\textit{in silico}$ validation with recovery and perplexity metrics is efficient but may not precisely reflect true foldability. To address this gap, we introduce two novel metrics: refoldability-based metric, which leverages high-accuracy protein structure prediction models as a proxy for wet lab experiments, and stability-based metric, which assesses whether models can assign high likelihoods to experimentally stable proteins. We curate datasets from high-quality CATH protein data, high-throughput $\textit{de novo}$ designed proteins, and mega-scale experimental mutagenesis experiments, and in doing so, present the $\textbf{PDB-Struct}$ benchmark that evaluates both recent and previously uncompared protein design methods. Experimental results indicate that ByProt, ProteinMPNN, and ESM-IF perform exceptionally well on our benchmark, while ESM-Design and AF-Design fall short on the refoldability metric. We also show that while some methods exhibit high sequence recovery, they do not perform as well on our new benchmark. Our proposed benchmark paves the way for a fair and comprehensive evaluation of protein design methods in the future. Code is available at https://github.com/WANG-CR/PDB-Struct.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. VibeProteinBench: An Evaluation Benchmark for Language-interfaced Vibe Protein Design

    q-bio.QM 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    VibeProteinBench is a three-stage language-interfaced benchmark revealing that no current LLM performs strongly across recognition, engineering, and generation of proteins.

  2. VibeProteinBench: An Evaluation Benchmark for Language-interfaced Vibe Protein Design

    q-bio.QM 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    VibeProteinBench is a new benchmark evaluating LLMs on open-ended language-interfaced protein design across recognition, engineering, and generation, with no model showing strong performance in all areas.

  3. SurfDesign: Effective Protein Design on Molecular Surfaces

    q-bio.BM 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    SurfDesign introduces surface-conditioned protein design via manifold modeling and equivariant message passing on surfaces integrated with pretrained language models, outperforming prior methods on binder and enzyme d...