Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Miriam Eisenstein
dblp:57/6780
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein structure prediction › protein-protein docking
docking model quality assessment |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Inherent limitations in protein-protein docking procedures · Bioinform. 2007 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › protein structure prediction
protein-protein docking |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Inherent limitations in protein-protein docking procedures · Bioinform. 2007 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology
structural bioinformatics |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | Inherent limitations in protein-protein docking procedures · Bioinform. 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
statistical error correction · 0.1geometric complementarity scoring · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | Inherent limitations in protein-protein docking proceduresabstractMOTIVATION: The limited success rate of protein-protein docking procedures is generally attributed to structure differences between the bound and unbound states of the molecules. Herein we analyze a large dataset of protein-protein docking results and identify additional parameters that affect the performance of docking procedures. RESULTS: We find that the distinction between nearly correct models (NCMs) and decoys depends on the size of the interface to be predicted thus setting a limit to the prediction ability of docking procedures, particularly those in which the geometric complementarity descriptor is dominant. The geometric complementarity score in grid-based docking carries a large statistical error which further reduces the distinction between NCMs and decoys. We propose a method for correcting the statistical error and show that the distinction is improved when the docking models are ranked by statistically equivalent scores. AVAILABILITY: MolFit can be downloaded from our website http://www.weizmann.ac.il/Chemical_Research_Support/molfit. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. Noga Kowalsman, Miriam Eisenstein |
Bioinform. | 2 |