Claim and evidence Close ×
Kryshtafovych et al. (Proteins, 7 October 2021) state that in CASP14 about two thirds of the 96 targets reached GDT_TS values above about 90, which they describe as approximately the limit expected given experimental error, and so are considered competitive with experiment in backbone accuracy. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Provision Statement · provision ID mod-casp14-gdt-two-thirds Date 2021-10-07 · publication Records dated 2021 → Scope and limits A stated result for the CASP14 target set at backbone level, by the CASP organisers in their overview of the round; it is not a statement about all proteins, about side chains or about any later round. Read in the PMC author manuscript; 7 October 2021 is the date in PMC's "Published in final edited form" line, kind not stated; issue December 2021.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
Critical Assessment of Methods of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) – Round XIV ↗ Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics (author manuscript in PubMed Central) · 2021-10-07
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “In CASP14, about 2/3 of the 96 targets reached GDT_TS values greater than that, and so are considered competitive with experiment in backbone accuracy.” Location in source section "Three-dimensional Protein Structure Modeling" (PMC author manuscript)
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-30
Source details and check notes Authors Andriy Kryshtafovych; Torsten Schwede; Maya Topf; Krzysztof Fidelis; John Moult Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-30 (SHA-256 df99b254a35a7840ddee25447610b25ab4a93154355ed2a0ec6db9b25d10710d). NIH author manuscript (PMC8726744) of Proteins 89(12):1607–1617; the publisher version of record was not retrieved. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-30 Language English (en) Attribution Andriy Kryshtafovych, Torsten Schwede, Maya Topf, Krzysztof Fidelis, John Moult, “Critical Assessment of Methods of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) – Round XIV”, 2021-10-07. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, AI in biology (research/ai-in-biology). The quotation (24 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-30. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Critical Assessment of Methods of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) – Round XIV ↗ Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics (author manuscript in PubMed Central) · 2021-10-07
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “previous CASP trend lines intercept the Y axis at about 90, indicating that that is approximately the limit expected” Location in source same section, preceding sentence
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-30
Source details and check notes Authors Andriy Kryshtafovych; Torsten Schwede; Maya Topf; Krzysztof Fidelis; John Moult Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-30 (SHA-256 df99b254a35a7840ddee25447610b25ab4a93154355ed2a0ec6db9b25d10710d). NIH author manuscript (PMC8726744) of Proteins 89(12):1607–1617; the publisher version of record was not retrieved. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-30 Language English (en) Attribution Andriy Kryshtafovych, Torsten Schwede, Maya Topf, Krzysztof Fidelis, John Moult, “Critical Assessment of Methods of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) – Round XIV”, 2021-10-07. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, AI in biology (research/ai-in-biology). The quotation (19 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-30. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. Gives the GDT_TS value to which "that" in the main quote refers. No human editorial review. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. An exact framework edition, or another document with an exact expression, states one provision: a capability threshold or risk level and its trigger, a required safeguard or action, a decision authority (who decides, recommends, can overrule or is informed), a stated exception, or another statement of its content, such as a licence term or a prospectus statement. The passage records what the document says, not implementation, compliance or effectiveness. Provisions with the same key align across editions of one family.
Date. Date given in PMC's "Published in final edited form" line for the organisers' overview paper (kind not stated).
Record ID aib-mod-casp14-gdt-two-thirds