Claim · 2021-10-07 · publication · Stated in source · Supported

Kryshtafovych et al. (Proteins, 7 October 2021) state that although the CASP14 performance is dominated by AlphaFold2, other groups also advanced substantially from CASP13, and that AlphaFold2 did not submit server models.

One recorded claim. The claim panel gives its qualification, the source passages with their place in each source, and how it was checked.

What it connects

Critical Assessment of Methods of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) – Round XIV → states provision → CASP14: other groups also advanced, and AlphaFold2 did not submit server models

Where it appears

No collection page holds this claim. It is listed with its records in the explorer.

Claim and evidence

Critical Assessment of Methods of Protein Structure Prediction (CASP) – Round XIVstates provision ↓CASP14: other groups also advanced, and AlphaFold2 did not submit server models

Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editorStated in sourceSupported

Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source

Provision: Statement · provision ID mod-casp14-other-groups
Date: 2021-10-07 · publication Records dated 2021 →

Scope and limitsThe CASP organisers' reading of their own comparison plots, in their overview of the round; it is recorded as their statement about participation and relative performance, not as a measurement.

The evidence 02

primary sourceSupports 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

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“Although this outstanding performance is dominated by AlphaFold2 (group 427), the dashed black line in Figure 1 shows that other groups also advanced substantially from CASP13.”

Location in source section on three-dimensional protein structure modeling

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 (26 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 sourceSupports 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

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“AlphaFold2 did not submit server models.”

Location in source same section

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 (6 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.

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-other-groups