Evaluates a model's ability to generate novel, drug-like molecules with high binding affinity for unseen protein pockets in structure-based drug design. It probes the trade-offs between binding energy, molecular properties, and synthesis feasibility. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CrossDocked-100k, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Vina Dock.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill crossdocked-sbdd-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Crossdocked Sbdd Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-crossdocked-sbdd-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: crossdocked-sbdd-eval
description: Evaluates a model's ability to generate novel, drug-like molecules with high binding affinity for unseen protein pockets in structure-based drug design. It probes the trade-offs between binding energy, molecular properties, and synthesis feasibility. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CrossDocked-100k, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Vina Dock.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2310.03223
bibtex_key: shen2023tacogfn
confidence: high
---
# crossdocked-sbdd-eval
> TacoGFN: Target-conditioned GFlowNet for Structure-based Drug Design — Shen et al. (2023) (arXiv:2310.03223, 2023)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a model's ability to generate novel, drug-like molecules with high binding affinity for unseen protein pockets in structure-based drug design. It probes the trade-offs between binding energy, molecular properties, and synthesis feasibility.
## Datasets
- **CrossDocked-100k** — total 100000; splits: train (-1), test (100)
## Metrics
- `Validity` — range: percent
- Percentage of unique generated molecules that are free of reconstruction errors and disconnections, validated using RDKit.
- `Vina Dock` **(primary)** — range: other
- Approximates the binding energy between a generated molecule and a protein pocket using AutoDock Vina; lower scores indicate higher binding affinity.
- `High Affinity` — range: percent
- Percentage of generated molecules that achieve a higher binding affinity (lower Vina Dock score) than the reference/native molecule.
- `QED` — range: [0, 1]
- Quantitative Estimate of Drug-likeness; estimates a molecule's suitability as an oral drug based on physicochemical properties.
- `SA` — range: [0, 1]
- Synthetic Accessibility score estimating synthesis difficulty, normalized to [0, 1] using the formula (10 - SA)/9.
- `Diversity` — range: [0, 1]
- Average pairwise Tanimoto distance calculated from molecular fingerprints of the generated set.
- `Success Rate` — range: percent
- Percentage of generated molecules that simultaneously satisfy QED > 0.25, SA > 0.59, and Vina Dock < -8.18.
- `Time` — range: other
- Average runtime in seconds required to generate 100 unique and valid molecules for a single protein pocket.
## Input / output format
**Input**: 3D protein pocket structure/coordinates
**Output**: 100 generated molecule structures (ligands) per protein pocket
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, pocket, ref_dock):
valid_mols = [m for m in predictions if rdkit.is_valid(m)]
validity = len(valid_mols) / len(predictions)
vina_scores = [dock_vina(m, pocket) for m in valid_mols]
high_aff = sum(1 for s in vina_scores if s < ref_dock) / len(valid_mols)
qed_vals = [calc_qed(m) for m in valid_mols]
sa_vals = [(10 - calc_sa(m)) / 9 for m in valid_mols]
diversity = avg_tanimoto_distance(valid_mols)
success = sum(1 for m in valid_mols if calc_qed(m) > 0.25 and calc_sa(m) > 0.59 and dock_vina(m, pocket) < -8.18) / len(valid_mols)
return validity, vina_scores, high_aff, qed_vals, sa_vals, diversity, success
```
## Common pitfalls
- Heavy molecules often achieve better Vina Dock scores but violate drug-likeness (QED) and Rule of 5 constraints, creating a trade-off that skews naive docking optimization.
- Success rate thresholds (QED > 0.25, SA > 0.59, Vina Dock < -8.18) are strict and specific to this benchmark; relaxing them significantly inflates reported performance.
- Diversity and reward quality trade off based on sampling temperature β; higher β yields better affinity but lower diversity, requiring careful temperature selection for fair comparison.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> In all evaluations, each structure-based generative model is tasked to produce 100 molecules (ligands) for each of the 100 unseen protein pockets from the CrossDock-100k test set. Evaluation metrics. We adopt the following commonly used metrics from Guan et al. (2023a) and Reidenbach (2024): (1) Validity is the percentage of unique generated molecules free of reconstruction errors and disconnections as determined by RDKit. (2) Vina Dock approximates the binding energy between a generated molecule and a protein pocket, where a lower docking score indicates a higher binding affinity. (7) Success Rate is the percentage of molecules which pass the same criteria (QED > 0.25, SA > 0.59, Vina Dock < -8.18) as in Long et al. (2022); Guan et al. (2023b); Zhou et al. (2024); Reidenbach (2024).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{shen2023tacogfn,
title={TacoGFN: Target-conditioned GFlowNet for Structure-based Drug Design},
author={Shen et al. (2023)},
year={2023},
note={arXiv:2310.03223}
}
```
- arXiv: 2310.03223
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!