Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Sep 27.
Published in final edited form as: J Chem Inf Model. 2021 Sep 1;61(9):4630–4644. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00737

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Performances of scoring functions on CASF-2016 benchmark. (A) Scoring power and (B) ranking power evaluated for original crystal ligand poses, (C) docking power measured by success rate for top1 scored poses from random decoy poses, (D) scoring power and (E) ranking power evaluated on locally optimized ligand poses. All scoring functions are ranked in a descending order. Performances of Lin_F9 are colored red, Autodock Vina are colored orange and other scoring functions are colored cyan. Performances of scoring functions on crystal structure in water environment are filled with “+”. Performances of scoring functions on locally optimized poses in dry environment are also filled with “/”. Performances of Lin_F9 and Vina on locally optimized poses in water environment are filled with “..”. Except for performances of Lin_F9 and Vina, which are computed in the current work, performance values for all other scoring functions are from Su et al.33