Table 1. Performance on native structure recognition.
| Decoy sets | DFIRE | DOPE | RW | RWplus | #Targets |
| 4state_reduced | 6 (−3.44) | 7 (−3.66) | 6 (−3.45) | 6(−3.54) | 7 |
| Fisa | 3 (−4.67) | 3 (−3.91) | 3 (−4.87) | 3(−4.96) | 4 |
| fisa_casp3 | 3 (−4.93) | 3 (−5.06) | 4 (−5.22) | 4(−5.14) | 5 |
| Lmds | 7 (−0.99) | 7 (−1.34) | 7 (−1.20) | 7(−4.28) | 10 |
| lattice_ssfit | 8 (−8.00) | 8 (−7.43) | 8 (−8.15) | 8(−8.59) | 8 |
| Moulder | 19 (−2.79) | 19 (−3.09) | 19 (−2.79) | 19(−3.04) | 20 |
| ROSETTA | 22 (−1.67) | 21 (−1.61) | 20 (−1.62) | 20(−2.30) | 58 |
| I-TASSER | 47 (−3.58) | 30 (−2.18) | 53 (−4.42) | 56(−5.38) | 56 |
| #Total(Z-score) | 115 (−2.94) | 98 (−2.47) | 120 (−3.23) | 123(−4.03) | 168 |
The data shows the number of targets which have the native structure ranked as the lowest energy. The values in parenthesis are the average Z-score of the corresponding potentials. The highlights are those having the highest number in each category.