Skip to content
Back to skills

Ssm Dta Dta Prediction Eval

ASecurity

Evaluates a model's ability to predict binding affinity between drug molecules and target proteins. It probes regression accuracy, correlation strength, and ranking consistency across varying data scarcity and generalization settings. Use when the user wants to benchmark on BindingDB, DAVIS, KIBA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Concordance Index (CI).

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 4 views
  • Added September 11, 2026
researchpython

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill ssm-dta-dta-prediction-eval --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Ssm Dta Dta Prediction Eval?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Ssm Dta Dta Prediction Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-ssm-dta-dta-prediction-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-ssm-dta-dta-prediction-eval)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: ssm-dta-dta-prediction-eval
description: Evaluates a model's ability to predict binding affinity between drug molecules and target proteins. It probes regression accuracy, correlation strength, and ranking consistency across varying data scarcity and generalization settings. Use when the user wants to benchmark on BindingDB, DAVIS, KIBA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Concordance Index (CI).
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2206.09818
  bibtex_key: pei2022ssmdta
  confidence: high
---

# ssm-dta-dta-prediction-eval

> SSM-DTA: Breaking the Barriers of Data Scarcity in Drug-Target Affinity Prediction — Pei et al. (2022) (arXiv:2206.09818, 2022)

## What this evaluates

Evaluates a model's ability to predict binding affinity between drug molecules and target proteins. It probes regression accuracy, correlation strength, and ranking consistency across varying data scarcity and generalization settings.

## Datasets

- **BindingDB** — total ?; splits: train (-1), valid (-1), test (-1)
- **DAVIS** — total ?; splits: train (-1), valid (-1), test (-1)
- **KIBA** — total ?; splits: train (-1), valid (-1), test (-1)

## Metrics

- `Concordance Index (CI)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
  - Measures the probability that predicted affinity values for two random pairs are ordered correctly relative to ground truth. CI = (pairs_correct + 0.5 * pairs_tied) / pairs_admissible.
- `RMSE` — range: other
  - Root mean square error between ground truth affinity scores and predictions. RMSE = sqrt(mean((t - p)^2)).
- `MSE` — range: other
  - Mean square error between ground truth affinity scores and predictions. MSE = mean((t - p)^2).
- `PC` — range: other
  - Pearson correlation coefficient measuring linear correlation between ground truth and predictions.
- `R^2` — range: other
  - R-squared representing the proportion of variance in the dependent variable predictable from the independent variable. R^2 = 1 - sum((t-p)^2)/sum((t-mean(t))^2).

## Input / output format

**Input**: Paired drug molecule (SMILES string) and target protein (amino acid sequence).

**Output**: Continuous regression score representing predicted binding affinity.

## Scoring recipe

```python
import numpy as np
def compute_ci(t, p):
    pairs_admissible = 0
    pairs_correct = 0
    pairs_tied = 0
    for i in range(len(t)):
        for j in range(i+1, len(t)):
            if t[i] != t[j]:
                pairs_admissible += 1
                if (t[i] > t[j] and p[i] > p[j]) or (t[i] < t[j] and p[i] < p[j]):
                    pairs_correct += 1
                elif p[i] == p[j]:
                    pairs_tied += 1
    return (pairs_correct + 0.5 * pairs_tied) / pairs_admissible

def compute_rmse(t, p):
    return np.sqrt(np.mean((np.array(t) - np.array(p))**2))
```

## Common pitfalls

- BindingDB and DAVIS require log-transforming raw IC50/Ki/Kd values using -log10(x/10^9), whereas KIBA uses a pre-computed aggregated score that should not be transformed.
- Dataset splits differ by dataset: BindingDB uses a 6:1:3 train/valid/test ratio, while DAVIS and KIBA use a 7:1:2 ratio.
- The 'unknown drug' setting on DAVIS requires filtering drugs via substructural k-means outlier detection before evaluation, rather than using a standard random split.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> Evaluation Metrics. We use (i) mean square error (MSE), (ii) root mean square error (RMSE), (iii) Pearson correlation coefficient (PC) [48], (iv) concordance index (CI) [49]. MSE and RMSE measure the difference between ground truth values and values predicted by the model, (v) R-squared (R^2) [15]. ... Following previous works [5, 14, 18, 15], results on BindingDB dataset are evaluated on RMSE and PC, results on DAVIS and KIBA datasets are evaluated by MSE and CI scores, and results on DAVIS dataset with unknown drug setting are evaluated on MSE and R^2 .

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{pei2022ssmdta,
  title={SSM-DTA: Breaking the Barriers of Data Scarcity in Drug-Target Affinity Prediction},
  author={Pei et al. (2022)},
  year={2022},
  note={arXiv:2206.09818}
}
```

- arXiv: 2206.09818

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.