Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Structure. 2020 Jul 9;28(9):1071–1081.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2020.06.006

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Impact of weighting the energy terms and exploring the limits of performance. A. Success rates for enzyme containing targets using the balanced (00) and electrostatics favored (02) weighting coefficient set in the ClusPro scoring function. B. Success rates for “other” type targets using the balanced (00), electrostatics favored (02), or special “other” (03) sets of weighting coefficients. For “other” type complexes, ClusPro employs 3 different sets of weighting coefficients, generates 500 conformations for each, and clusters the resulting 1500 structures. C. Success rates for the different types of targets obtained by using the best of 105 weighting coefficient sets (theoretical limit, TL), versus success rates obtained by using the weighting coefficient sets as currently implemented (CI) in ClusPro.