title: Designing and evaluating the MULTICOM protein local and global model quality prediction methods in the CASP10 experiment.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Protein model quality assessment is an essential component of generating and using protein structural models. During the Tenth Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP10), we developed and tested four automated methods (MULTICOM-REFINE, MULTICOM-CLUSTER, MULTICOM-NOVEL, and MULTICOM-CONSTRUCT) that predicted both local and global quality of protein structural models.
  
  
  RESULTS
  MULTICOM-REFINE was a clustering approach that used the average pairwise structural similarity between models to measure the global quality and the average Euclidean distance between a model and several top ranked models to measure the local quality. MULTICOM-CLUSTER and MULTICOM-NOVEL were two new support vector machine-based methods of predicting both the local and global quality of a single protein model. MULTICOM-CONSTRUCT was a new weighted pairwise model comparison (clustering) method that used the weighted average similarity between models in a pool to measure the global model quality. Our experiments showed that the pairwise model assessment methods worked better when a large portion of models in the pool were of good quality, whereas single-model quality assessment methods performed better on some hard targets when only a small portion of models in the pool were of reasonable quality.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Since digging out a few good models from a large pool of low-quality models is a major challenge in protein structure prediction, single model quality assessment methods appear to be poised to make important contributions to protein structure modeling. The other interesting finding was that single-model quality assessment scores could be used to weight the models by the consensus pairwise model comparison method to improve its accuracy.
authors.forename: Renzhi
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Cao
authors.forename: Zheng
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.affiliation: Computer Science Department, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, USA. chengji@missouri.edu.
authors.forename: Jianlin
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Cheng
mesh_terms: D019295:Computational Biology / Q000379:methods*; D030562:Databases, Protein; D008958:Models, Molecular; D011487:Protein Conformation; D011506:Proteins / Q000737:chemistry*; D012984:Software; D060388:Support Vector Machine
chemical_list: D011506:Proteins
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 May 18;101(20):7594-9
references.pmid: 15126668
references.citation: Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 1995;30(1):1-94
references.pmid: 7587278
references.citation: Proteins. 2014 Feb;82 Suppl 2:112-26
references.pmid: 23780644
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2010 May 15;26(10):1299-307
references.pmid: 20385730
references.citation: Proteins. 2004 Dec 1;57(4):702-10
references.pmid: 15476259
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1;31(13):3370-4
references.pmid: 12824330
references.citation: Proteins. 2009 Dec;77(4):778-95
references.pmid: 19603484
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2005 Jul 1;33(Web Server issue):W72-6
references.pmid: 15980571
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2011 Jun 15;27(12):1715-6
references.pmid: 21546397
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2010 Jan 15;26(2):182-8
references.pmid: 19897565
references.citation: Protein Sci. 2006 Apr;15(4):900-13
references.pmid: 16522791
references.citation: BMC Bioinformatics. 2012 Sep 10;13:224
references.pmid: 22963006
references.citation: Proteins. 2001;Suppl 5:13-21
references.pmid: 11835478
references.citation: Proteins. 2003;53 Suppl 6:480-5
references.pmid: 14579336
references.citation: BMC Bioinformatics. 2007 Aug 21;8:304
references.pmid: 17711571
references.citation: Proteins. 2011;79 Suppl 10:185-95
references.pmid: 21997748
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2008 Feb 15;24(4):586-7
references.pmid: 18184684
references.citation: J Mol Biol. 1993 Dec 5;234(3):779-815
references.pmid: 8254673
references.citation: Nature. 1992 Mar 5;356(6364):83-5
references.pmid: 1538787
references.citation: Proteins. 2009 May 15;75(3):638-47
references.pmid: 19004001
references.citation: Proteins. 2010 Apr;78(5):1137-52
references.pmid: 19927325
references.citation: Proteins. 2009;77 Suppl 9:185-90
references.pmid: 19585661
references.citation: J Comput Chem. 2004 Apr 30;25(6):865-71
references.pmid: 15011258
references.citation: Proteins. 2009;77 Suppl 9:167-72
references.pmid: 19544566
references.citation: Proteins. 2010 Dec;78(16):3428-36
references.pmid: 20872556
references.citation: Protein Sci. 2008 Jul;17(7):1212-9
references.pmid: 18469178
references.citation: J Bioinform Comput Biol. 2012 Jun;10(3):1242003
references.pmid: 22809379
references.citation: PLoS Comput Biol. 2009 Aug;5(8):e1000478
references.pmid: 19696883
references.citation: Biopolymers. 1983 Dec;22(12):2577-637
references.pmid: 6667333
references.citation: Proteins. 1999;Suppl 3:22-9
references.pmid: 10526349
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Sep 1;25(17):3389-402
references.pmid: 9254694
references.citation: J Mol Biol. 2003 Jul 18;330(4):705-18
references.pmid: 12850141
references.citation: Proteins. 2011;79 Suppl 10:161-71
references.pmid: 21987485
references.citation: J Mol Biol. 1997 Apr 25;268(1):209-25
references.pmid: 9149153
references.citation: Comput Appl Biosci. 1996 Aug;12(4):357-8
references.pmid: 8902363
references.citation: BMC Struct Biol. 2008 Mar 17;8:18
references.pmid: 18366648