Skip to main content

Table 2 Performance comparison using the SP2 set

From: MAESTRO - multi agent stability prediction upon point mutations

Method #Predictions a Pearson’s ρ b σ (kcal/mol) b
AUTOMUTE 315 0.46/0.45/0.45 1.43/1.46/1.99
CUPSAT 346 0.37/0.35/0.50 1.91/1.96/2.14
Dmutant 350 0.48/0.47/0.57 1.81/1.87/2.31
Eris 334 0.35/0.34/0.49 4.12/4.28/3.91
I-Mutant-2.0 346 0.29/0.27/0.27 1.65/1.69/2.39
PopMuSiC-2.0 350 0.67/0.67/0.71 1.16/1.19/1.67
SDM 350 0.52/0.53/0.63 1.80/1.81/2.11
mCSM 350 0.73/0.74/0.82 1.08/1.10/1.48
MAESTRO-Score 350 0.56/0.57/0.68 −/ −/ −
MAESTRO 350 0.70/0.69/0.76 1.13/1.17/1.67
  1. Results except for MAESTRO are taken from Dehouck et al. [12] and Pires et al. [14] respectively. aThe test set contains 350 entries, however several methods failed to compute the Δ ΔG prediction for some mutants, resulting in a reduced number of predictions. In these cases Δ ΔG was set to 0.0 kcal/mol for calculating the correlation coefficient. bThree values are given for Pearson’s ρ as well as for the associated standard errors. They correspond (i) to the whole validation set, (ii) the subset of 309 mutants for which all methods provide a result, and (iii) the subset of 87 mutants with an experimental Δ ΔG≥2 kcal/mol or Δ ΔG≤2 kcal/mol respectively.