A modified definition of Sov, a segment‐based measure for protein secondary structure prediction assessment

We present a measure for the evaluation of secondary structure prediction methods that is based on secondary structure segments rather than individual residues. The algorithm is an extension of the segment overlap measure Sov, originally defined by Rost et al. (J Mol Biol 1994;235:13–26). The new definition of Sov corrects the normalization procedure and improves Sov's ability to discriminate between similar and dissimilar segment distributions. The method has been comprehensively tested during the second Critical Assessment of Techniques for Protein Structure Prediction (CASP2). Here, we describe the underlying concepts, modifications to the original definition, and their significance. Proteins 1999;34:220–223. Published 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  W. Kabsch,et al.  How good are predictions of protein secondary structure? , 1983, FEBS letters.

[2]  W R Taylor,et al.  Recognition of super-secondary structure in proteins. , 1984, Journal of molecular biology.

[3]  J. Gibrat,et al.  Secondary structure prediction: combination of three different methods. , 1988, Protein engineering.

[4]  G. Schulz,et al.  A critical evaluation of methods for prediction of protein secondary structures. , 1988, Annual review of biophysics and biophysical chemistry.

[5]  G. Fasman.  Prediction of Protein Structure and the Principles of Protein Conformation , 2012, Springer US.

[6]  I. Kuntz,et al.  Tertiary Structure Prediction , 1989 .

[7]  M. Sternberg.  Prediction of protein structure and the principles of protein conformation , 1990 .

[8]  Janet M. Thornton,et al.  Prediction of progress at last , 1991, Nature.

[9]  Steven A. Benner,et al.  Predicting de novo the folded structure of proteins , 1992, Current Biology.

[10]  J. Mesirov,et al.  Hybrid system for protein secondary structure prediction. , 1992, Journal of molecular biology.

[11]  Michael J. E. Sternberg,et al.  Secondary structure prediction: Current Opinion in Structural Biology 1992, 2:237–241 , 1992 .

[12]  N. Colloc'h,et al.  Comparison of three algorithms for the assignment of secondary structure in proteins: the advantages of a consensus assignment. , 1993, Protein engineering.

[13]  B. Rost,et al.  Prediction of protein secondary structure at better than 70% accuracy. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[14]  G. Barton,et al.  The limits of protein secondary structure prediction accuracy from multiple sequence alignment. , 1993, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  Zhi-Xin Wang.  Assessing the accuracy of protein secondary structure , 1994, Nature Structural Biology.

[16]  B. Rost,et al.  Redefining the goals of protein secondary structure prediction. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[17]  Z. Y. Zhu,et al.  A new approach to the evaluation of protein secondary structure predictions at the level of the elements of secondary structure. , 1995, Protein engineering.

[18]  F E Cohen,et al.  Evaluation of current techniques for Ab initio protein structure prediction , 1995, Proteins.

[19]  David C. Jones,et al.  Progress in protein structure prediction. , 1997, Current opinion in structural biology.

[20]  C Venclovas,et al.  Numerical criteria for the evaluation of ab initio predictions of protein structure , 1997, Proteins.

[21]  S. Bryant,et al.  Critical assessment of methods of protein structure prediction (CASP): Round II , 1997, Proteins.